BT 765 
.F85 
Copy 1 







> 3> 

> >> 

> > >> 


> - 


^7^^ 


- > • 

fr > •• 

si 


> 


^> >o » 
~>^ > :» 




^T 


> 


>*> 3>T3 


> 

> 

> 

z> 

> 


> _._zx^ 


> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

* > 


> :>» 


> ^3^ 

1 


> 
^> 

i> 


^> z 










:> : 
> > 




3> 




£>_, 


3 

> 






^^ ^ ^ 


^^~-^^ 


I> 35*> 


■ ^^ >>r^ 


> 

> 


_^ 






mi 




5T> 




bj^ 




^> >^> i>-">>:> 



> > ^> > > 






j->> 

S^l 












m 






33 



> ^> o > ■■■■> J 


* 5? *>_3 £P 


)>* j 




» ^> >^s> mtZ 


^ -> pr> m 


► ■ ■> \% ~~* 


Jg , 


» ~> ~> ~3> 5> > ^ 


Bfe ' "5i> ' *~^> . ^> 


>o« " 


3t7 5 


^^> ^> > 


^^ 3 S> 


y& ^p 


^T 


:b* :> ^ > > 


~ : H* ^> >> 


9 :2>> 


^ 


:■» :> > ^s> :> 


2j^ '^3?> ^y ' 


\> 55Q&» 


J>^ 


:j*> 3> > 


3^ ^ ^C* 


^> ^>S 


^> 


^^> x^> > 


T* ;^> >> ;T& 3» 


;z*> 


w J> > ;> : : >>. -^ 


jp » » 2» 


®k& i: 


^r ' 


►~> >:> >j> "3 


0* >> s> S> 


2fe> 4 


3^ 


3> X> oo ^Ji 






» , 


> :T> > ^P} 


> * ;> f>1 ~> 


>/> "^ 


' 


.~VT> >^ ~"5£> t> >>_> 


>.> ^"^ 


k» ' 


* > -y> » _ 


*> > -y»T> 


;:> »~> 


"^■T" 


fcV"T> » 


-5r> > v> ^> 


'y V j) 


"~^3> | 


Z>:>3> !3» 


-» :> v> :g> 


v t) 


^3 


»> ^z> > 


^» > • > > 


i . K> 


^3j 


>^^>> >^> 


» » >> o 


) i ■ "O 


~^ 


» > >-> > 2> 


;»£> o > 


0> 


~^» 


>VX> '^> 


» > r> ,.r> 


i »o 


7> 


>> :>> ^> 


"X>'"> >">-X> 


, V 


Z^&* 


^^ ^> 5> 


^S>3 >>> 


. ■ ) 


~~^)t 


*> 5> ^> 


"» > ' P " ►■ 


, ,> 


I^F* 


»•> 1> ,, >7> . 


"»> O^E> > 


g> 


~^> 


> y> yz> 


» ^> ->> 


D 


Z3** 


> ^r> k) : g> 


*> , 


O 


~~^ 


O ^> ■ §> 


>-> > ^> > 


• s> 


Si 


»S \> p >;> 


C^vSS* . >■- 


"5>~> 


% 


>^ v> ; r> *.; 


^^>-?> o 


J S> 


3 


► > . T> , >, >7> 


^-imo..<r* 


S> 


_> 


O 7% r> ^ "~ 


>> > ■> > 


S> 


v> 



THE 



NEW BIRTH 



OR 



Bible Sancttfication. 



BY 



F. F. FRENCH. 

rWOQ 



_^i 







It 



MONTPELIER: 

FREEMAN STEAM PRINTING HOUSE AND BINDERY. 

1874. 






X 



«5 



Entered, according- to Act of Congress, in the year 1874, by 

FRANKLIN F. FRENCH, 
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 



The Library 
of Congress 



WASHINGTON 



PREFACE. 



My only apology for offering this book to the reader 
is a conviction of duty. 

It is a very imperfect presentation of the subject I 
have endeavored to explain, but if God shall see fit to 
make use of it in influencing others to examine the 
views thus imperfectly presented, my labor may not be 
in vain. 

There is some repetition, not only of my own lan- 
guage, bat also of Scripture quotations, which may not 
be profitable ; but which, on the whole, I have not 
thought best to avoid. AUTHOR. 



EXPLANATION OF FIRST PRINCIPLES. 



CHAPTER L 

General Vieiv of the Two Covenants. 

The Abrahamic covenant, or covenant of promise, was 
made with Abram when he departed out of Haran to 
sojourn in the land of Canaan. 

This covenant made with Abram, and confirmed or 
ratified through his seed, Christ, was made four hun- 
dred and thirty years before the giving of the law. This 
covenant of promise made with Abram, and also with 
the Fathers, was the gospel covenant in promise. That 
is, the promise made in the covenant was not to be ful- 
filled until after a specified length of time. 

The covenant promised something in the future. 

Now the Lord said unto Abram, get thee out 
of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from 
thy father's house, unto a land that I will show 
thee : 

And I will make of thee a great nation, and 
will bless thee, and make thy name great ; and 
thou shalt be a blessing : 



6 General View of the Two Covenants. 

And I will bless them that bless thee, and 
curse him that curseth thee : and in thee shall 
all families of the earth be blessed. — Gen. 12 : 
1-3. 

And the Angel of the Lord called unto Abra- 
ham out of heaven the second time, 

And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the 
Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and 
hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, 

That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multi- 
plying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of 
heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea 
shore ; and thy seed shall possess the gate of 
his enemies : 

And in thy seed shall all the nations of the 
earth be blessed ; because thou hast obeyed my 
voice.— Gen. 22: 15-18. 

And the Scripture, foreseeing that God 
would justify the heathen through faith, preach- 
ed before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, in 
thee shall all nations be blessed. — Gal. 3: 8. 

The seed through whom the promised blessing was to 
come, was Christ. 

I^ow to Abraham and his seed were the 
promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as 
of many; but as of one. And to thy seed, 
which is Christ. — Gal. 3:16. 

Christ did not come until about 1911 years after the 
covenant of 'promise was made with Abram. Therefore 



General View of the Two Covenants. 7 

the fulfillment of the promise contained in the covenant 
could not take place before that time. 

Now this covenant of promise was to remain the cov- 
enant of promise until the seed should come through 
whom the promise was to be fulfilled. 

The promise was to be fulfilled through, not to the seed 
that was to come. 

During the time that intervened between the making 
of the covenant with Abram, and the fulfillment of the 
promise contained in the covenant, by the coming of 
Christ, the covenant is regarded as the old covenant. 
It is called the old, or first covenant during that time. 

The promise referred to, as peculiar to the covenant 
of promise, is the following : 

I will put my law in their inward parts, and 
write it in their hearts. — Jere. 31 : 33. 

After Christ came and fulfilled said promise, it was 
then called the new or gospel covenant. 

Before Christ came it was the gospel covenant in 
promise, but not ratified. 

It lacked the ratification blood, the blood of Christ. 

A peculiar characteristic of the covenant of promise 
was this : it made promise of something in the future, 
that could not be realized, or fulfilled in the present 
tense. 

Hence, the true worshiper under the old covenant 
looked forward to the time of Messiah's coming as a 
time of redemption or salvation. 



8 General View of the Two Covenants. 

Although the salvation to be realized by the people of 
God, and by all nations, through the coming of Christ, 
the Messiah, was but imperfectly comprehended by the 
worshiper, under the old covenant, yet, it was distinctly 
and clearly stated in the Scriptures. 

Something of the same vagueness, or imperfect com- 
prehension of what that redemption or salvation was, to 
be, which was to come through Messiah, and which 
could not be realized before His advent, seems to hang, 
as a vail, over the understanding of the Church, as it 
appears to me, even at the present day. 

The redemption that was lacking to the people of 
God under the old covenant, and for the realization of 
which they looked forward to the coming of Messiah as 
the time when they were to come in possession of it, 
w r as a spiritual redemption. 

The lack of this spiritual redemption experienced by 
the people of God, under the old covenant, made it nec- 
essary to introduce the " ceremonial law" or the "hand- 
writing of ordinances" until Christ should come, and 
by the shedding of His own blood redeem His people, 
not only from legal but also from spiritual bondage. 

When Christ came, the " ceremonial law," or " hand- 
writing of ordinances," was taken out of the way, or 
done away, and the long-promised redemption be- 
stowed. 

Then, the gospel covenant, which had been a covenant 
of promise, and called the first, ovoid covenant, became 
the new, or second covenant. 



Genekal View of the Two Covenants. 9 

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath 
made the first old. Now that which decayeth 
and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. — Heb. 
8:13. 

The first covenant waxed old because the " ceremo- 
nial law " was about to be abrogated. 

The covenant of promise became the new covenant 
after it was ratified by the blood of Christ, because a 
new dispensation of grace, not before enjoyed, was then 
bestowed. The promise of the covenant which writes 
the law of God in the heart was then fulfilled, and a 
" new and living way consecrated for us, through the 
vail, that is to say, his flesh. " 

This " new and living way " " consecrated" or opened 
up * through the vail of Christ's flesh,' was a spiritual 
kingdom set up in the heart, not before experienced. 

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I 
will make a new covenant with the house of 
Israel, and with the house of Judah : 

Not according to the covenant that I made 
with their fathers in the day that 1 took them 
by the hand to bring them out of the land of 
Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although 
1 was a husband unto them, saith the Lord : 

Bat this shall be the covenant that I will make 
with the house of Israel after those days, saith 
the Lord ; I will put my law in their inward 
parts, and write it in their hearts. — Jere. 31 : 
31-33. 



10 General View of the Two Covenants. 

The nature, therefore, of the first or old covenant 
was like that of a promise, not to be fulfilled until after 
n specified length of time ; — made in the form of a will 
or testament, (called sometimes the "first testament,") 
hy a father to his child. 

It contained certain carnal ordinances binding upon 
the child, until he came in possession of the promised 
inheritance contained in the will or testament made by 
iris father. 

He was under a tutor, or school-master, the law. He 
was therefore in bondage, under the elements of a car- 
nal, or "ceremonial law," which could not, with all of 
Its ordinances, make him free in Christ. 

The old or first covenant kept the child of God not 
only in a state of legal, but also a state of spiritual non- 
age ; but promised freedom when Christ, the Messiah, 
should come. 

The nature of the new or second covenant is like that 
of a pledge, or promise to be verified in the present 
tense; and under which the promisee has, or may have 
already come in possession of the promised estate of his 
iather . 

The contrast between the nature of the two covenants, 
or between the gospel covenant before it was ratified by 
the blood of Christ, and the gospel covenant after it was 
ratified by the blood of Christ, (or what is the same 
thing, the contrast between the spiritual conditions of 
the children of God under these two covenants respect- 
ively,) is illustrated or explained by the following fig- 
ure : 



General View of the Two Covenants. 11 

Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a 
child, differeth nothing from a servant, though 
he be lord of all ; 

But is under tutors and governors until the 
time appointed of the father. 

Even so we, when we were children, were in 
bondage -under* the elements of the world : 

But when the fulness of the time was come, 
God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made 
under the law, 

To redeem them that were under the law, 
that we might receive the adoption of sons. — 
Gal. 4 : 1-5. 

That is, under the old covenant, or before Christ 
came, we were in bondage to the law, and under the el- 
ements of the world, with no way of redemption there- 
from. 

Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them 
that know the law,) how that the law hath do- 
minion over a man as long as he liveth? 

For the woman which hath a husband is 
bound by the law to her husband so long as 
he liveth ; but if the husband be dead, she is ' 
loosed from the law of her husband. 

So then if while her husband liveth, she be 
married to another man, she shall be called an 
adulteress : but if her husband be dead, she is 
free from that law ; so that she is no adulteress, 
though she be married to another man. 



12 General View of the Two Covenants. 

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become 
dead to the law by the body of Christ ; that ye 
should be married to another, even to him who 
is raised from the dead, that ye should bring 
forth fruit unto God. 

For when we were in the flesh, the motions 
of sin, which were by the law, dfd work in our 
members to bring forth fruit unto death. 

But now we are delivered from the law, that 
being dead wherein we were held ; that we 
should serve in newness of spirit, and not in 
the oldness of the letter. — Rom. 7 : 1-6. 

As I understand it, the meaning of the Holy Spirit, as 
explained by the figure here introduced is this : The 
brethren to whom Paul wrote were under the dominion 
of the law of ordinances as long as they were in the 
flesh, or until the flesh was dead; the same as the wo- 
man, who had a husband, was bound by the law that 
existed between husband and wife, until the husband 
was dead. 

By the "flesh" is here meant inbred sin, or the car- 
nal mind ; — called also "The old man,' 1 "The law of 
sin and death," &c. 

In Gal. 4 : 3, the same thing is meant by the expres- 
sion, "The elements of the world." That is, the law 
of the carnal mind, under which the world is held, or 
bound . 

Now this inbred sin, or the " flesh," must be destroyed 
or die, before the worshiper could be freed from the law 
of ordinances, the same as the husband must die, before 



General View of the Two Covenants. 13 

the wife could be free from the law which bound her to 
her husband. 

"But now we are delivered from the law, that being 
dead wherein we were held." 

The thing here referred to, as being dead, is not the 
law but inbred sin, or the "fleshy 

When inbred sin was dead, then, the worshiper was 
dead to the law. 

" Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to 
the law by the body of Christ" That is, the body of 
Christ has slain inbred sin, — (not the law) . 

The shedding of Christ's blood washed away inbre'd 
sin, and freed the worshiper from that service which 
was according to the " oldness of the letter," and ena- 
bled him to " serve in newness of spirit." 

By the "oldness of the letter," is meant that bondage 
to inbred sin which excluded the " law of the spirit of 
life in Christ Jesus." That is, the worshiper under the 
old covenant was dragged down, (if I can be allowed 
the expression,) and fettered or bound, in his spiritual 
movements, by a law in his members, that warred 
against the law of spiritual advancement and victory. 

The motions of sin, or of that " body of death " from 
which he could not be delivered, were discovered by the 
law, and worked by the law, in his members, to " bring 
forth fruit unto death." 

From this bondage to inbred sin, there was no deliv- 
erance until the " body of sin and death" was destroy- 
ed by the " body of Christ." 

The destruction of inbred sin by the " body of 
Christ," makes the difference between that service winch 



14: General View op the Two Covenants. 

is rendered according to the " oldness of the letter," 
and that which is rendered in " newness of spirit." 

The destruction of inbred sin, or the " body of this 
death," (as Paul expresses it,) by the " body of Christ," 
delivered the worshiper, under the old covenant, from 
the law, marked the commencement of the New-cove- 
nant era, and makes the difference between the two cov- 
enants. 

The difference between the spiritual conditions of the 
worshipers under the two covenants respectively, is ex- 
plained in another place as follows : 

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ 
Jesus, hath made me free from the law of sin 
and death. 

For what the law could not do, in that it was 
weak through the flesh, God sendiftg his own 
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, 
condemned sin in the flesh : 

That the righteousness of the law might be 
fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but 
after the Spirit. — Rom. 8 : 2-4. 

That is, the worshiper under the old covenant was in 
bondage to the "law of sin and death," and could not 
be freed therefrom until the sending of God's Son in the 
likeness of sinful flesh," " condemned sin in the flesh." 
TJien, the " righteousness of the law " could be fulfilled 
in the experience of the worshiper. 

Then his marriage with inbred sin, or the " law of sin 
and death," and consequently with the "law of ordi- 
nances," could be dissolved, and he could be married to 



General View of the Two Covenants. 1£ 

Christ in the union of a new and spiritual life, not be- 
fore enjoyed. 

The inevitable condition of the children of God under 
the old covenant, was that of bondage to the " law or 
sin and death." 

The speciality of the New-covenant dispensation i& 
freedom from that bondage. 

The same doctrine is taught again by the following: 
figure : 

Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, 
do ye not hear the law ? 

For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, 
the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free- 
woman. 

But he who was of the bond-woman, was 
born after the flesh ; but he of the free woman 
was by promise. 

Which things are an allegory : for these are 
the two covenants ; the one from the mount 
Sinai, which gendereth, (or beareth children) 
to bondage, which is Agar. — Gal. 4 : 21-24. 

The apostle continues this doctrinal explanation un- 
der another figure, and says : 

For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and 
answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in 
bondage with her children. — Verse 25. 

That is, ''this Agar" is the mount-Sinai covenant, or 
the old covenant which included the law, as given from 
mount Sinai. 



16 General View of the Two Covenants. 

" And answer eth to Jerusalem which now is " — Resem- 
bles Jerusalem now in bondage to her enemies — a fit 
representation of that part of the Jewish Church which 
had rejected Christ, and were then living in the bond- 
age of the old-covenant dispensation. 

By implication, the old covenant is here called the 
Jerusalem which is below, in contradistinction to the 
new covenant, or the "Jerusalem which is above," 
" which," (as the Apostle says,) "is the mother of us 
all." That is, all that believe. 

After this presentation of the two covenants, by the 
two Jerusalem.?, the apostle returns to his former fig- 
ure of the bond-woman and of the free. 

Alluding to Sarah, the free woman, as a representative 
of the covenant of promise before it was ratified by the 
blood of Christ, it is said : (verse 27,) Bcjoice, thou bar- 
ren, that bear est not ; break forth and cry, thou that trav- 
aileth not, 

Sarah, the free woman, was barren, or bore no chil- 
dren. 

In this particular she represents the covenant of 
promise previous to its ratification by the blood of 
Christ, 

Previous to its ratification, the covenant of promise 
gendered, or bore no children. 

The promise of the covenant by which the law of 
God was written in the heart, being unfulfilled,, the cov- 
enant, as represented by Sarah in her barrenness, was 
destitute of children. 



General View of the Two Covenants. 1? 

As Sarah obtained adopted children by Kagar, the 
bond- woman, so the covenant of promise claimed adopt- 
ed children by the covenant of bondage, or law of or- 
dinances, represented by the bond-woman, 

God made the following promise to Abraham in re- 
gard to Sarah : 

I will certainly return unto thee according to 
the time of life : and lo, Sarah thy wife shall 
have a son. — Gen. 18 : 10. 

When this promise was fulfilled, it was then proper 
to use the following language in reference to the once 
barren but now fruitful woman : " Rejoice, thou barren. 
that bearest not;" (didst not bear) "break forth and 
cry, thou that travailest not," (didst not travail.) 

The fulfillment of the promise by which the barren 
woman became fruitful, represents the fulfillment of the 
new-covenant promise, by which the new-covenant bore 
children. 

This promise was fulfilled when the blood of Christ 
was shed, and inbred sin thereby taken away. 

It was then proper to apply the language applied to 
the woman, as an allegorical representative of the cov- 
enant, to the covenant itself. 

And the fulfillment of the new-covenant promise, by 
which the hitherto barren covenant could gender, or 
bear children, is what is meant by the Holy Spirit, when 
He cries by the month of the prophet in the following 
language: 

3 



18 General View of the Two Covenants. 

Sing, barren, thou that didst not bear, 
break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou 
that didst not travail with child : for more are 
the children of the desolate than the children 
of the married wife, saith the Lord. — Isa. 54: 1. 

The covenant of promise was not in force until after its 
ratification by the blood of Christ; and consequently 
bore no children until after that time. 

For this reason it was spoken of as desolate, or un- 
married, and as barren, or without children. 

This desolate or barren state of the new covenant be- 
fore its ratification, is phototyped, or allegorically rep- 
resente*d by Sarah's barrenness, before the promise. of a 
son was fulfilled to tier. 

After its ratification, the new covenant is spoken of as 
having more children than the old covenant, or the mar- 
rie& wife. That is, the fruitful wife. 

This is in accordance with the following promise 
made to Abraham. 

I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heav- 
en, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore. 
—Gen. 22 : 17. 

The children of the new covenant, after its ratifica- 
tion, included all that believed, both Jews and Gentiles. 

The children of the free, but once barren woman, .are 
more numerous than the children of the bond- woman, 
or the old covenant, which had always gendered or 
borne children to bondage. 



General View of the Two Covenants. 19 

To carry out the figure, and to mark more plainly the 
difference between the privileges of the two covenants, 
the apostle adds, verse 31 : So then, brethren, we are not 
children of the bond-woman, but of the free. 

That is we are not children of the old covenant, but 
of the new. 

As Agar, the bond-maid, was in bondage as a servant 
and bore children that were in the same bondage : so 
the old covenant gendered, or bore children that were in 
bondage, not only to the law of ordinances, but also to 
the law of inbred sin, or sin in the " inward parts." 

As Sarah, the free woman, bore no children until the 
promise of a son was fulfilled to her; so the new cov- 
enant, or covenant of promise, bore no children, until 
the promise of the covenant was fulfilled by the blood of 
Christ, 



CHAPTER II. 



Imperfect view in regard to the difference be- 
tween the two covenants — the entertaining of 
which view excludes the possibility of a clear 
understanding of the new birth or sanctifica- 
Hon, as taught in the Bible. 

When I ask what the new covenant does for men, that 
the old covenant did not do, I get" no answer that ac- 
cords with my view of the Scriptural teaching in regard 
to it. 

The only answer that I get, may be summed up in 
these words: " Under the new covenant, men have the 
same spiritual blessings that were enjoyed under the old 
covenant, but in a greater degree. They have more 
light and love. The graces of the Spirit are more fully 
developed under the gospel dispensation, than they were 
under the old-covenant dispensation." 

If I ask what was meant by lack of perfection, (fre- 
quently spoken of as existing under the old-covenant 
dispensation,) 1 get about the same answer. " Neither 
the light, love, holiness or happiness of the worshiper 



Imperfect View of the Two Covenants. 21 

was as perfect as is attainable under the new covenant, 11 
li They did not have that access or nearness to God that 
is enjoyed under the gospel dispensation." 

When I ask wherein the old covenant was faulty, I 
get the same answer. "It did not perfect the worship- 
ers in the graces of the Spirit, to that degree of perfec- 
tion that the new covenant does. 1 ' 

When I ask in regard to the true children of God, 
who " died in the faith, not having received the prom- 
ises," (mentioned in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews,) — 
whether they were the sons of God by adoption, or by 
birth, I get no decided answer. There seems to be no 
definite motion about it. 

As far as my knowledge extends, the general under- 
standing in the church is, that the difference between 
the blessings conferred by the two covenants is in de- 
gree only, and not in kind. 

That is, the work of grace wrought in the heart, either 
in justification or sanctification, is different only in cZe- 
gree. The idea is, that justification and sanctification are 
more perfect under the new covenant, than they were 
under the old covenant. 

The same imperfect view is entertained by our stand- 
ard writers and commentators, as far as I am acquainted 
with them. 

In Wesley's notes on Hebrews, [ find the following: 
From all that has been said, it appears that the law, the 
Mosaic dispensation, being a bare, un substantial shadoio 
of good things to come, of the gospel blessings, and not 



22 Imperfect View of the Two Covenants. 

the substantial solid image of them, can never, with the 
same kind of sacrifices, though continually repeated, 
make the comers thereunto 'perfect, either as to justifica- 
tion, or sanctification. — Heb. 10: 1. 

Again; — For there is implied in this new and ever- 
lasting priesthood, and in the new dispensation connect- 
ed therewith, a disannulling of the preceding command- 
ment — An Abrogation of the Mosaic law. For the weak- 
ness and unprofitableness thereof — For its insufficiency 
either to justify or to sanctify. For the law — Taken by 
itself, separate from the gospel. Made nothing perfect — 
could not perfect its votaries, either in faith or love, in 
happiness or holiness. But the bringing in of a better 
hope — Of the gospel dispensation, which gives us a bet- 
ter ground of confidence, does. — Heb. 7: 18-19. 

Now the idea contained in these comments, if I am 
not mistaken, is this: both in justification and sanc- 
tification, as conferred upon the votaries under the old 
covenant, there was something lacking. They were not 
perfect; which lack, or imperfection, is made up under 
the new covenant. The worshipers, were not free from 
either the guilt or power of sin. 

The instruction contained in the comments above 
quoted is substantially this : although the worshipers 
were in some degree pardoned, or justified, yet they 
were not so pardoned, or justified, as to be free from 
guilt ; and also that they were in about the same degree 
sanctified. 



Impekfect View of the Two Covenants. 23 

The old covenant, on account of the weakness and 
unprofitableness thereof, was insufficient either to justi- 
fy, or to sanctify perfectly. 

On Heb. 8 : 7, Clarke has the following: (If that first 
had been faultless.} This is nearly the same argument 
with that in chapter 7:11. The simple meaning is : If 
the first covenant had made a provision for and actually 
conferred pardon or purity, or given a title to eternal 
life, then there could have been no need of a second ; 
but the first covenant did not give these things, there- 
fore a second was necessary: and the covenant that 
gives these things is the Christian covenant. 

Again — Clarke, on Heb. 9:9. Which) Tabernacle 
and its services, was a figure, a dark enigmatical repre- 
sentation, of the time then present, — of that age and dis- 
pensation, and of all those Avho lived under it. 

In which, catli 1 on, during which, time or dispensation, 
were offered both gifts and sacrifices — eucharistic offer- 
ings and victims for sin, that could not make him that 
did the service, whether the priest who made the offering , 
or the person who brought it in the behalf of his soul, per - 
feet as pertaining to the conscience — could not take away 
guiit from the mind, nor purify the conscience from 
dead works. The whole was a figure, or dark represen- 
tation, of a spiritual and more glorious 8}^stem : and 
although a sinner, who made these offerings and sacri- 
fices according to the law, might be considered as hav- 
ing done his duty, and thus he would be exempt from 



24 Imperfect View of the Two Covenants. 

many ecclesiastical and legal disabilities and punish- 
ments; yet his conscience would ever tell him that the 
guilt of sin was still remaining, and that it was im- 
possible for the blood of bulls and^goats to take it away 
Thus even he that did the service best continued to be 
imperfect— had a guilty conscience, and an unholy heart. 

If I understand Wesley and Clarke, they are, both of 
them, as it looks to me, about equally wide from the 
meaning of the Holy Spirit in their comments above 
quoted: — Wesley in thinking that the imperfection 
spoken of in the verses upon which he comments, was 
imperfect pardon, or sanctification — as though there were 
no provisions under the old covenant whereby the vo- 
taries could be fully, or perfectly pardoned — as though 
they were still under condemnation, when fully keep- 
ing the covenant enjoined on them. 

To suppose that God holds men guilty, when fully 
keeping the covenant that He Himself has instituted 
and enjoined, is to severely reflect on His justice and 
moral character. 

And it is absurd, as it looks to me, to suppose that 
God does not perfectly pardon, whenever he pardons at 
all. 

But perhaps he means with Clarke, (in his comment 
on Heb. 3 ; 7, above quoted,) that the first covenant con- 
ferred neither 4 pardon nor purity, or a title to eternal 
life J 

But this is contrary to the Old-Testament Scriptures 
on the subject of pardon or forgiveness, under the old 
covenant. 



Impereect View of the two Covenants. 25 

As far as my knowledge extends, there is nothing es- 
sentially different from this teaching of Wesley and 
Clarke, to be found among the writings of other stand- 
ard authors and commentators, in regard to the imper- 
fection of the votaries, or worshipers, under the old- 
coy enant dispensation . 

Therefore, for a summary statement of the imperfect 
view that is generally entertained in regard to the differ- 
ence between the two covenants, I would make use of 
the following : It is a failure to comprehend distinctly 
and definitely what the old covenant did do, and what 
it did not do, for those who kept it; and consequently 
a failure to understand definitely what the new covenant 
does for those who keep it, that the old covenant did not 
do. 



CHAPTER III. 



The imperfection j or faultiness, existing under 
and belonging to the old covenant, explained. 

In pursuance of this subject, I would say, First, The 
imperfection existing under the old covenant could not 
have been imperfect pardon, or justification. 

Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this 
people according unto the greatness of thy 
mercy, and as thou hast, forgiven this people, 
from Egypt even until now. 

And the Lord said, I have pardoned accord- 
ing to thy word, — Num. 14: 19-20. 

Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy peo- 
ple ; thou hast covered all their sin. — Psa. 85: 2. 

Let the wicked forsake his way, and the un- 
righteous man his thoughts : and let him return 
unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon 
him ; and to our God, for he will abundantly 
pardon. — Isa. 55 : 7. 

All but willful or presumptuous sins were forgiven 
under the old-covenant dispensation. 



Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 27 

And the man that will do presumptuously, 
and will not hearken unto the priest that stand- 
eth to minister there before the Lord thy God, 
or unto the judge, even that man shall die : 
and thou shall put away evil from Israel.— 
Dent. 17: 12. 

The above passages of Scripture, with many others, 
prove that there were full provisions for the pardon of 
sins under the old-covenant dispensation. 

And if God pardoned at all, to say that he did not 
'perfectly pardon, or that there was any imperfection 
about the work accomplished, is to charge God with do- 
ing His own work imperfectly. 

Secondly. The imperfection existing under and be- 
longing to the old covenant, could not have been im- 
perfect love; for God required of His people, under 
the oM covenant, to love Him with all the heart. 

And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with 
all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with 
all thy might. — D-eut. 6 : 5. 

The imperfection attending the votaries under the old 
covenant was a necessary concomitant of the covenant. 
The covenant being faulty, there was a corresponding 
faultiness or imperfection attending those who kept the 
covenant perfectly. 

Now if we can ascertain wherein the old covenant 
was faulty, we may then be able to understand wherein 
those who kept the covenant were not made perfect. 



28 Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 

In instituting an inquiry in regard to the faultiness of 
the old covenant, I notice that the promises upon which 
it was established were not as good promises as the 
promises upon which the new covenant is established, 

Brit now hath he obtained a more excellent 
ministry, by how much also he is the mediator 
of a better covenant, which was establis hed up- 
on better promises. — Heb. 8: 6. 

The promises of the new covenant are better than 
those of the old. 

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I 
will make a new covenant with the house of 
Isr ael, and with the house of Judah : 

Not according to the covenant that I made 
with their fathers, in the day that I took them 
by the hand to bring them out of the land of 
Egypt; which my covenant they brake, al- 
though I was a husband unto them, saith the 
LrAd : 

But this shall be the covenant that I will 
make with the house of Israel after those days, 
saith tile Lord ; I will put my law in their in- 
ward parts, and write it in their hearts. — Jere. 
31: 31-33. 

The promise, " I will put my law in their inward parts 
and write it in their hearts, " is a better promise than the 
old covenant contained. 



Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 29 

The following promise seems to refer to the same 
days, and to belong to the same covenant : 

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you 
and ye shall be clean : from all your filthines, 
and from all your idols will I cleanse you. 

A new heart also will I give you, and a new 
spirit will I put within you : and I will take 
away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will 
give you a heart of flesh. — Ezek. 36 : 25-26. 

The foregoing promises belong to the new covenant 
only. The old covenant had no promises of the same 
import. 

There were, therefore, no provisions, under the old 
covenant, for the writing of the law of God in the 
heart. The promises by which this great work can be 
realized belong to the new covenant. 

The putting of the law of God in the "inward parts" 
or the ' writing of it in the heart/ so that this law was 
the law of the heart, or it was natural for the heart to 
keep the law, was what the old covenant did not do, and 
what the new covenant does do. 

Notwithstanding the transgressor was pardoned, yet 
the law of God was never the law of his heart. It was 
not natural for him to keep the law; for God did not 
put the law in the " inward parts," or " write it in the 
heart." 

The lack of the promise, in the old covenant, to write 



30 Imperfection, etc , of the Old Covenant. 

the law of God in the heart, constituted the faultiness of 
the covenant. 

The absence of this law in the " inward parts," or in 
the heart, was the imperfection which was a necessary 
concomitant of the covenant, and which in all cases at- 
tended the votaries under that dispensation. 

Said lack, or defectiveness, is sujaplied, or made up, 
under the new covenant, and is Christ-like, or Christian 
perfection. 

The perfection of having the ' law of God written in 
the hearty could not, therefore, exist under the old cove- 
nant. 

The lack of this perfection was the imperfection, or 
faultiness, existing under and belonging to the old-cove- 
nant dispensation. 

If therefore perfection were by the Leviti- 
cal priesthood, (for under it the people received 
the law,) what further need was there that an- 
other priest should rise after the order of Mel- 
chizedek, and not be called after the order of 
Aaron?— H^b. 7:11. 

For the law having a shadow of good things 
to come, and not the very image of the things, 
can never with those sacrifices which they 
offered year by year continually, make the com- 
ers thereunto perfect. — Heb. 10: 1. 



Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 31 

For this law made nothing perfect, but the 
bringing in of a better hope did. — Heb. 7 : 19. 

The perfection brought in by the " better hope" is the 
New Birth, or Sanctification. 



CHAPTER IV. 

The writing of the law of God in the heart. 

There may be a difference of opinion in regard to the 
meaning of the Holy Spirit, in the language, " I will 
put my law in their inward parts 5 and unite it in their 
hearts," but to me, it can have but one signification. 

First, It cannot mean what is meant in Paul's lan- 
guage to the Romans, when he says : 

For when the Gentiles, which have not the 
law, do by nature the things contained in the 
law, these having not the law, are a law unto 
themselves. 

Which show the work of the law written in 
their hearts, their conscience also bearing wit- 
ness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accus- 
ing or else excusing one another. — Rom. 2 : 14- 
15. 

I understand the meaning of the above quotation to be 
this : the Gentiles to whom he refers, had a consciousness, 
or knowledge of what ought to be done, and of what 



Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 33 

ought not to be clone, given them by the enlightening 
influences of that Spirit " which lighteth every man that 
cometh into the world; 1 ' and which " reproves the world 
of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment." 

Under the elevating and restraining influences of the 
Spirit of God, and the voice of conscience, men do many 
things in accordance with the law of God, without any 
radical change of heart. 

A knowledge of wh&tought to be done, and of what 
ought not to be done, under the above named influences, 
was, I believe, what was meant by the*" work of the 
law written in the heart" in the above quotation from 
Romans. 

The above named knowledge, or consciousness, may 
exist in the heart without having the law, itself, written 
therein. That is, there may be a knowledge of righ; 
and wrong written in the heart, when it is not natural 
for the heart to do the right and forsake the wrong. There 
may be a consciousness of moral obligation to keep the 
law of God existing in the heart, when that law is not 
the law of the heart ; or it is not natural for the heart to 
keep the law. 

This consciousness was what was meant by the " work 
of the law written in the heart." 

But when the law, itself, is written in the heart, that 
law will be the law of the heart, and it will be natural 
for the heart to keep the law. 

Secondly, The state of the heart when the law of God 
is written therein, cannot be the state described by Paul, 
when he says : 

3 



34 Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 

For I delight in the law of God after the in- 
ward man ; 

But I see another law in my members, war- 
ring against the law of my mind, and bringing 
me into captivity to the law of sin which is in 
my members. "— Rom. 7 : 22-23. 

For he immediately exclaims, verse 2*: " O wretched 
man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of 
this death?" And then adds, verse 25: " I thank God 
through Jesus^ Christ our Lord." 

Now Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, in 
which the writing of the law of God in the heart is 
promised, and, as Paul declares, delivers from this ' body 
of sin and death.' 

If the new-covenant promise, of writing the law of 
God in the heart, means nothing more than the state 
described by Paul, (wherein was a law in his members 
* warring against the law of his mind, and bringing bim 
into captivity to the law of sin,') then, in that case, the 
new covenant does not accomplish^ what Christ, as its 
mediator, or surety, promised to do: viz., "save His 
people from all sin." 

Thirdly, The meaning of the new-covenant promise, 
" I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it 
in their hearts," I believe is clearly and fully explained 
in Paul's letter to the Hebrews. 

After showing that sin could not be taken away by 
^he offerings of the law, he says : 

For by one offering he hath perfected forever 
them that are sanctified. 



Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 35 

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to 
us : for after that he had said before, 

This is the covenant that I will make with 
them after those days, saith the Lord ; I will 
put my laws into their hearts, and in their 
minds will I write them. — Heb. 10: 14-16. 

m 

Here we have Scripture to explain Scripture. The 
Holy Ghost, through Paul, explains what was meant by 
the new-covenant promise. This promise was made 
by the Holy Ghost, through Jeremiah, and is here re- 
ferred to, as a witness to the truthfulness of the statement 
just made: viz., " For by one offering he hath perfected 
for ever them that are sanctified." The perfection of 
*' them that are sanctified," is what was meant by the 
new-covenant promise. 

This perfection was the fulfillment of the promise. 
They both mean the same thing. To be sanctified, is to 
have the law of God written in the heart. 

k ' For after that he had said before" That is, the 
Holy Ghost had said the same thing in the new-covenant 
promise, through Jeremiah, that He now says by Paul : 
viz : '* For by one offering he hath perfected forever them 
that are sanctified. V 

On Hebrew 10: 15, Wesley has the following note: 
Verse 15. In this and the three following verses, the 
apostle winds up his argument concerning the excellency 
and perfection of the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ. 
He had proved this before by a quotation from Jeremiah ; 
which he here repeats, describing the new covenant as 



36 WAITING OF THE LAW OF GOD IN THE HEART. 

now completely ratified, and all the blessings of it se- 
cured to us by the one offering of Christ, which renders 
all other expiating sacrifices, and any repetition of his 
own, utterly needless. 

Clarke on Heb. 10: 15. Verse 15. The Holy Ghost 
— is a witness to us. The words are quoted from Jere- 
miah 31 : 33, 34, (that is, the words that constitute the 
witness,) and we are here assured that Jeremiah spoke 
by the inspiration of the Spirit of God. 

Barnes on Heb. 10: 15. Whereof the Holy Ghost is a 
witness to us. That is, the Holy Ghost is proof of the 
truth of the position here laid down — that the one atone- 
ment made by the Redeemer lays the foundation of the 
eternal perfection of all who are sanctified. The witness 
of the Holy Ghost here referred to, is that which is fur- 
nished in the Scriptures, and not any witness in our- 
selves. Paul immediately makes his appeal to a passage 
of the Old Testament, and he thus shows his firm con- 
vie lion that the Scriptures were inspired by t'ie Holy 
Ghost. For after that he had said before. The apostle 
here appeals to a passage which he had before quoted 
from Jer. 31 : 33, 34. 

Now this sanctification which was the verification or 
fulfilment of the new-covenant promise, could not take 
place until the new covenant was ratified, or established 
by the blood of Christ, or, (which is the same thing,) by 
the "offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 

Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, 
God. He taketh away the first, (that is, the 



Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 37 

first covenant,) that he may establish the second. 
By the which will we are sanctified through 
the offering of the body of Jesns Christ once for 
all.— Heb. 10: 9-10. 



CHAPTER V. 

The reason why the law of God could not be 
written in.the heart, under the old covenant. 

The reason why the law of God could not be written 
in the heart, under the old-covenant dispensation, was 
simply because sin could not be taken away. 

For it is not possible that the blood of bulls 
and of goats should take away sins. — Heb. 10 : 
4. 

For the law having a shadow of good things 
to come, a ad not the very image of the things, 
can never with those sacrifices, which they 
offered year by year continually, make the 
comers thereunto perfect. 

For then would they not have ceased to be 
offered? because that the worshipers once 
purged should have had no more conscience of 
sins.— Heb. 10 : 1-2. 

For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the 
ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanc- 
tifieth to the purifying of tbe flesh ; 

How much more shall the blood of Christ, 
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself 



Why the Law Itself could not be Written. 39 

without spot to God ; purge your conscience 
from dead works to serve the living God. — Heb. 
9: 13-14. 

And every priest standeth daily ministering 
and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, 
which can never take away sins. — Heb. 10 : 1L 

" The law of sin and death " must remain in the heart 
until it is freed therefrom by the " law of the Spirit of 
life in Christ Jesus." 

The freedom of the heart from the " law of sin and 
death, 1 ' could be accomplished only by the blood of 
Christ; which blood was not available under the old 
covenant, because it had not then been shed. 

For what the law could not do, in that it was 
weak through the flesh, God sending his own 
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, 
condemned sin in the flesh : 

That the righteousness of the law might be 
fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh, but 
after the Spirit. — Rom. 8 : 3-4. 

The putting of the law of God in the " inward parts, 1 
or the ' writing of it in the heart,' is to make that law 
the law of the heart, and therefore free it from the " law 
of sin and death" 

This work could be accomplished by the blood of 
Christ only; for His blood alone could "purge the con- 
science from dead works." 

The " sending " of God's Son, in the " likeness of sinful 



4:0 Why the Law Itself could not be Written. 

flesh, 1 ' must take place before the condemnation of sin in 
the flesh could take place. 

No faith in a Saviour to come, could at any time 
" purge the conscience from dead works. 1 ' 

" Suneidesin" rendered conscience, does not always 
mean that faculty of the soul which distinguishes be- 
tween right and wrong, and which prompts to do the 
right, and forsake the wrong. 

It sometimes means the soul. On Heb 9 : 14, Wesley 
has the following note: "Purge our conscience — Our 
inmost soul. 11 

It means also the mind's apprehension, or conscious- 
ness of sin. 

The last clause of Heb. 10: 2, reads: Because that 
the worshipers once purged should have had no more 
conscience of sins. Here conscience means the mind's 
apprehension, or consciousness of sin. 

Wesley translates this clause thus : " Because that the 
worshipers having been once purged would have had 
no more consciousness of sins. 1 ' 

He that did the service of the law perfectly, must have 
been freed from a consciousness of guilt; for a faithful 
or perfect observance of the requirements of the law, 
was all that God required. It was all that the wor- 
shiper could do ; and therefore having kept the covenant 
enjoined on him, he was no^longer troubled with a 
guilty conscience. 

He was justified, or pardoned. His actual transgres- 
sions, or sins were forgiven. 



Why the Law Itself could not be Written. 41 

Yet, he was not perfected, " as pertaining to the con- 
science.' 1 There was an apprehension or consciousness 
of something wrong remaining in the heart, which could 
not be removed by the offerings of the law, for these 
offerings could not take away sin. 

It was sin, inbred sin, that remained, and could not 
be taken away, except by the blood of Christ. And this 
blood had not then been shed, and therefore there was 
no perfection under the law, or " by the Levitical priest- 
hood;" "for the law made nothing perfect, but the bring- 
ing in of a better hope did." 

The purging of the conscience, or the " inmost soul," 
is the work of the blood of Christ, made available by 
being shed. 

When this blood was shed, then, the " better hope," or, 
" The gospel dispensation" (as Wesley explains the 
phrase, " better hope") was brought in. 

Since the bringing in of this " better hope," or of the 
gospel dispensation — the establishment of the new cov- 
enant, the conscience, or " inmost soul " can be purged, 
and the worshiper perfected. 

For by one offering he hath perfected for 
ever them that are sanctified. 

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to 
us : for after that he had said before, 

This is the covenant that I will make with 
them after those days, saith the Lord ; I will 
put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds 
will I write them ; 



42 Why the Law Itself could not be Written. 

And their sins and iniquities will I remember 
no more. 

Now where remission of these is, there is no 
more offering for sin. 

Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter 
into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 

By a new and living way, which he hath con- 
secrated for us, through the vail, that is to 
say, his flesh ; 

And having a high priest over the house of 
God; 

Let us draw near with a true heart in full as- 
surance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled 
from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed 
with pure water. — Heb. 10 : 14-22. 

The writing of the law of God in the heart, is the New 
Birth, or Sanctification. 

As has been shown, this could not take place until 
after the taking away of sin, by the shed blood of Christ. 

The existence of sin in the heart, excludes the expe- 
rience of the New Birth, 



CHAPTER VI. 

The entrance and office of the moral law. 

By the term law, is sometimes meant the moral law, 
and sometimes the ceremonial law. 

In the following quotation, the law of ceremonies, or 
the "handwriting of ordinances" is undoubtedly re- 
ferred to : 

But now we are delivered from the law ; that 
being dead wherein we were held. — Rom. 7 : 6. 

In the following, the moral law must be the law re- 
ferred to : 

For we know that the law is spiritual : but I 
am carnal, sold under sin. — Rom. 7 : 14. 

The moral law is of eternal obligation, and eoulcl not» 
therefore, have been added by Moses. 

It did, however, take on a written form by the hand 
of Moses, and entered into the field of conflict with sin, 
as the written word of God. 

The written word of God, (if I may be allowed the 
method of explanation,) became a verbal incarnation of 
His law ; and it may be said that the law of God was 
made words and dwells anion £ us. 



4A Entrance and Office of the Moral Law. 

Since Moses, the law of God has been with us in 
written words, as not before, 

This is what I understand by the expression: " Trie 
law entered." 

Morever the law entered that the offense might 
abound. — Rom. 5:20. 

The word, "offense" here means the same a.s "sin" 
in the last clause of the verse. 

It means the Mien sinful state of heart that "passed 
upon all men " from Adam. It has this meaning in the 
next verse, and also in several places in the sixth 
chapter. 

In the sixth verse of the sixth chapter, the same thing 
is meant by the " old man" and the " body of sin " It 
is the "carnal mind, 1 ' or inbred sin. 

This state of the heart came upon all men through 
Adam. 

Therefore, as by the offense of one judg- 
ment came upon all men to condemnation ; even 
so by the righteousness of one the free gift 
came upon all men unto justification of life. 

For as by one man's disobedience many were 
made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall 
many be made righteous.— Rom. 5 : 18-19. 

Now, it does not mean that " many ivere made sin- 
ners" in the sense of being guilty, because Adam 
sinned ; but the meaning is, all men partook of the sinful, 
fallen state of heart that Adam had, after he sinned, and 
became sinners by nature, 



Entrance and Oeftce of the Moral Law. 45 

In this way, " death passed upon all men" because all 
men partake of this sinful nature. 

Men do not know this sinful state of the heart — this 
fallen Adamic inheritance, except by the moral law. 

For by the law is the knowledge of sin. — 
Eom. 3 : 20. 

I had not known sin, but by the law : for I 
had not known lust, except the law had said, 
Thou shalt not covet. 

But sin taking occasion by the commandment, 
wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. 
For without the law, sin was dead. 

For I was alive without the law once : but 
when the commandment came, sin revived, and 
I died. 

And the commandment, which was ordained 
to life, I found to be unto death. 

For sin, taking occasion by the command- 
ment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 

Wherefore the law is holy, and the command- 
ment holy, and just, and good. 

Was then that which is good made death 
unto me ? God forbid. But sin, that it might 
ajopear sin, working death in me by that which 
is good ; that sin by the commandment might 
become exceeding sinful. — Rom. 7 : 7-13. 

Sin, by the commandment, becomes exceeding sinful, 
not because the commandment makes it more sinful, but 
because its nature is thereby made to appear. 



46 Entrance and Office of the Moral Law. 

" Sin was dead without the law,™ but the command- 
ment ( which is the written law) wakes up sin, or revives 
it, and its nature is thereby discovered. 

In this way, the " offense" is made to abound, 

God did not give his people a law, in order to make 
their sinful, fallen natures more sinful; but the " law 
entered" — became a written law, that the "offense" 
might be discovered. 

The office of the moral law is to give light, or under- 
standing, and to furnish a rule of life. 

The written moral law, as the " sword of the Spirit" is 

Sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing 
even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, 
and of the joints and marrow, and is a discern- 
er of the thoughts and intents of the heart. — 
Heb. 4 : 12. 

" The law entered" therefore, not only as a rule of 
life; but that the nature of the "offense" inbred sin, 
might thereby be made to appear. 

The entrance of the moral law shows the necessity of 
the New Birth, or Sanctification. 



CHAPTER VII. 

Eeign of the death of inbred sin. 

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to 
Moses, even over them that had not sinned after 
the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is 
the figure of him that was to come. — Eom. 5 : 14. 

This verse does not mean that the bodies of men died, 
or were subject to death, during the time from Adam to 
Moses. 

The declaration that " death reigned from Adam to 
Moses," of course is true in regard to the body; but the 
death of the body is not the death here referred to. 

The length of time that the body is subject to the reign 
of death, and the relation of this death of the body to 
the first and second Adam, is explained, 1 Cor. 15 : 21-22 : 

For since by man came death, by man came 
also the resurrection of the dead. 

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall 
all be made alive. 

The death referred to in the fifth of Romans is the 
death that God pronounced upon Adam, saying, In 



48 Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 

the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." 
—Gen. 2:17. 

Adam died according to the word of the Lord. 

The death which came upon Adam in the day that he 
sinned, was the death of indwelling sin, or the " law of 
sin and death." It is the death of the " carnal mind" 
which is enmity against God : for it is not subject to the 
law of God, neither indeed can be. — Rom. 8: 7. 

For to be carnally minded is death. — Rom. 8 : 6. 

This death must reign until destroyed, or taken away 
by the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." It 
reigned until Christ brought in the "free gift" 

The/ree gift is the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ 
Jesus" which makes "free from the law of sin and 
death." 

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ 
Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin 
and death. 

For what the law could not do, in that it was 
weak through the flesh, God sending his own 
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, 
condemned sin in the flesh. 

That the righteousness of the law might be 
fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but 
after the Spirit. — Rom. 8 : 2-4. 

This death " passed upon all men " from Adam. 

Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the 
world, and death by sin ; and so death passed 



Reign op the Death of Inbked Sin. 49 

upon all men, for that all have sinned. — 
Eom. 5 : 12. 

The last clause of this verse : " For that all have 
sinned," as it reads, does not express the apostle's mean- 
ing. 

The death here referred to, did not " pass upon all 
men "for that, or because they had sinned. 

It passed upon them in consequence of Adam's sin, or 
" offense." 

The true meaning would be more clearly expressed 
thus : By whom all have borne the imputation of sin. 
That is, all men inherit inbred sin, or death, by the " one 
man" — Adam. 

It did not " pass upon all men" in consequence of their 
own transgression; for it reigned " even over them that 
had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgres- 
sion." 

It " passed»upon all men," except Adam, without the 
exercise of their free will or consent. No one was ever 
guilty for inheriting this Adamic death. 

Hence, it is called the " Paraptoma," (the " offense.") 
The word properly signifies a casual or involuntary fall, 
fault, offense, sin; and in the apostle's argument is con- 
trasted with the " Charisma" (the " free gift.)" 

Now as the " offense " "came upon all men" inde- 
pendently of their own choice; so also the " free gift" 
comes in like manner. 

Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment 
came upon all men to condemnation ; even so 

4 



50 Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 

by the righteousness of one the free gift came 
upon all men unto justification of life. — Rom. 
5:18. 

The "free gift " is life in the soul, and the %i offense !1 
is death in the soul. 

This Adamic death, or sin, was not imputed during 
the time from Adam to Moses, because the law bad not 
entered to expose it, and because there was no blood 
that could take it away. 

For until the law sin was in the world ; but 
sin is not imputed when there is no law. — Rom. 
5: 13. 

By sin in this verse is not meant transgression, but 
inbred sin. Transgressions were imputed before the en- 
trance of the law, or before Moses. 

Inbred sin is the death referred to, as reigning from 
Adam to Moses. % 

It reigned, not only from Adam to Moses, but from 
Adam to Christ. 

It is said that " death reigned from Adam to Moses," 
not because it did not reign after Moses, but because the 
law exposed its reign after Moses, and not before. 

After the entrance of the moral law had exposed the 
reign of this death, it was not necessary to say that it 
reigned. 

Notwithstanding the reign of the death of inbred sin 
was discovered by the entrance of the law, {for the " law 
entered, that the offense might abound") yet, it was not 



Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 51 

imputed until after the offering of Christ was made, be- 
cause there was no blood that could take it away. 

"The first man Adam" was a figure of the " last 
Adam," by way of contrast. 

" The first man Adam " brought in the reign of death, 
and the " last Adam " brought in the reign of life. 

The last Adam destroyed the reign of the first Adam, 
(as far as sin reigns in the heart) by destroying the 
reign of inbred sin. 

The reign of the death of inbred sin lasted from the 
first to the last Adam. 

Bat death reigns over the body from the first Adam to 
the resurrection. 

When the body shall have received the "adoption," 
or redemption from the bondage of corruption, then 
will "mortality be swallowed up of life" Then will 
Christ's victory over sin and its consequences be com- 
plete. 

For this corruptible must put on incorrup- 
tion, and this mortal must put on immortality. 

So when this corruptible shall have put on 
incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on 
immortality, then shall be brought to pass the 
saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in 
victory.— 1 Cor. 15:53-54. 

Then Christ will have put all enemies under His feet. 

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is 
death.— 1 Cor. 15:26. 
That is, the reign of death over the body. 



52 Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 

After showing how the reign of the death of inbred 
sin, or the " offense" came upon all men through the 
first Adam; and also after showing how much more 
abundant is the reign of life through the last Adam, 
Christ, the apostle proceeds, in the sixth chapter, to ex- 
plain and enforce the privilege of being free from the 
reign of this Adamic death. 

In the sixth, however, he calls it " sin" and the " old 
man." 

What shall we say then? Shall we continue 
in sin, that grace may abound? 

God forbid: how shall we, that are dead to 
gin, live any longer therein ? 

Know ye not that so many of us as were bap- 
tized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his 
death ? 

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism 
into death : that like as Christ was raised up 
from the dead by the glory of the Father, even 
so we also should walk in newness of life. 

For if we have been planted together in the 
likeness of his death, we shall be also in the 
likeness of his resurrection : 

Knowing this, that our old man is crucified 
with him, that the body of sin might be de- 
stroyed, that henceforth we should not serve 
sin. 

For he that is dead is freed from sin. 

Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe 
that we shall also live with him: 



Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 53 

Knowing that Christ, being raised from the 
dead, dieth no more; death hath no more do- 
minion over him. 

For in that he died, he died unto sin once ; 
but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 

Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be 
dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God 
through Jesus Christ our Lord. 

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal 
body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. 

Neither yield ye your members as instru- 
ments of unrighteousness unto sin, but yield 
yourselves unto God, as those that are alive 
from the dead, and your members as instru- 
ments of righteousness unto God. 

For sin shall not have dominion over you, 
for ye are not under the law, but under grace. 
—Rom. 6: 1-14. 

To be 4 baptised into the death of Christ ' (verse 3) 
means to have sin die in us, as Christ's body died. 

For in that he died, he died unto sin once — verse 10. 

Christ did not ' die unto sin ' in Himself, for " in him 
is no sin." The meaning is, His body died, or waa 
slain, in order to destroy the body of sin in ns. 

Knowing this, that our old man is crucified ivith him, 
that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth 
we should not serve sin — verse 6. 

Sin reigns until destroyed. For he that is dead is 
freed from sin — verse 7. 



M Reign op the Death of Inbked Sin. 

That is, he in whom the " old man" is dead is freed 
from sin. 

Freedom from sin by the crucifixion of the " old man" 
or the destruction of the " body of sin" puts an end to 
the reign of death in the heart. The reign of the death 
of inbred sin excludes the experience of the New Birth. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

Allegorical explanation of the two covenants. 

Which things are an allegory : for these are 
the two covenants ; the one from the Mount 
Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is 
Agar.— Gal. 4:24. 

As has been previously noticed, Agar is an allegorical 
representative of the old covenant. She was in bond- 
age, and bore children to bondage. 

Ishmael, the son of the bondwoman, was born after, 
or according to the flesh; that is, in a natural way. 
There was nothing supernatural about his birth. 

Hagar, the bondwoman, was in no kind of bondage 
different from that in which the free woman was bound 
except a legal bondage. She was a servant, and by 
virtue of her position as a servant, was under certain 
rules of subjection, or obedience. By these rules she 
was in bondage to her mistress, the free woman. 

Sarah, the free woman, was not a servant, and there- 
fore not in bondage as a servant. 

The bondage of the bondwoman represents the bond- 
age of the old covenant. 



56 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 

The bondwoman was in bondage not only to inbred 
sin, but she was also in legal bondage to the law, or will 
of her mistress. 

Hagar, the bondwlfe of Abraham, was added as a 
wife, to supply (as far as possible) a deficiency in the 
free wife. 

The free wife bere no children. Therefore to obtain 
children, Hagar was added to Sarah, the free wife, as a 
bondwife to Abraham. 

But the children of Hagar were not the natural chil- 
dren of Sarah, the free wife. She could only claim 
them as adopted children. 

The covenant of promise could gender or bear no 
children until after it was ratified, or established, and 
the promise of the covenant fulfilled. 

No one could be made free from inbred sin, and be 
born of the Spirit, or experience the new birth. 

Therefore the law of ordinances was " imposed on 
them until the time of reformation," or the new birth. 

In the faithful observance of this law of ordinances 
they could be pardoned, and kept in a state of justifica- 
tion, and thereby treated as adopted children. 

This law of ordinances therefore supplied the defi- 
ciency of children in the covenant of promise, as Hagar 
supplied Sarah's deficiency, in bearing children to bond- 
age for Sarah's adoption. 

At the same time, the sacrifices or offerings of the 
ceremonial law pointed the worshiper to the offering 
of Christ as the only sacrifice or offering that could 
make him a child of the free woman, by the destruc- 



Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 57 

tion of inbred sin, and the consequent experience of the 
new birth. 

The new birth was the promised inheritance promised 
in the covenant of promise, and to which the worshiper 
under the old covenant was entitled by virtue of his 
adoption into the family or church of God by the keep- 
ing of the law of ordinances. 

As Hagar was added to Sarah, the free woman, in 
order that the free woman might obtain adopted chil- 
dren; so the law of ordinances was added to the cove- 
nant of promise, that the covenant of promise, while in 
its barren state, might have adopted children. 

As Sarah, the free wife, did not obtain natural chil- 
dren by Hagar, the bond wife ; so neither did the cove- 
nant of promise obtain natural children by the addition 
of the law of ordinances. 

They were in bondage to inbred sin, and the law of 
ordinances, as Hagar was in bondage to inbred sin, and 
the law, or will of her mistress. 

Sarah, the free woman, before the promise of a son 
was fulfilled, represents the covenant of promise, pre- 
vious to its ratification, and the consequent fulfillment 
of the promise of the covenant. 

After the promise of a son was fulfilled to the free 
woman, she was a representative of the covenant of 
promise after its ratification by the blood of Christ. 

They both had children of their own. 

The son of the bondwoman was " born after the flesh. " 
There was nothing supernatural about his birth. 

The son of the free woman was " by promise." That 



58 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 

is, his parents were supernatu rally endowed with quali- 
fications for his birth. 

The birth of Isaac, by 'promise, does not show that he 
was not born with the same fallen nature, the same car- 
nal mind, or "law of sin, and death," that the son of 
the bondwoman had. But it shows allegorically that 
the children of the new covenant, or covenant o£ prom- 
ise, after its ratification, or establishment by the blood 
of Christ, were to be made free from inbred sin, or the 
"law of sin and death," 

The birth of Isaac by promise refers to the supernat- 
ural endowment of his parents to bring forth, or bear a 
son. 

The promise was a promise of physical, not spiritual 
birth. 

But this manner of birth, or way of being qualified to 
bear children, was an allegorical representation of some- 
thing spiritual. 

The supernatural physical birth of Isaac was a figure, 
or prototype of the spiritual birth of the children of 
God under the new covenant. That is, it showed that 
the children of God under the new covenant were to be 
spiritually born, free from inbred sin. 

Isaac was a child of promise because he was physical- 
ly born according to the promise made to Abraham. 

It is said that he was " bom after the Spirit,^ not be- 
cause he was spiritually born of God at his birth — not 
because he had a new heart, but because his parents be- 
lieved, " against hope" that they should have a son. 

To be "born after the Spirit," was the same as to be 
born "by promise." 



Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 59 

The faith of his parents in the promise, being given 
or inspired by the Spirit, it is said he was " born after 
the Spirit." 

Isaac could be physically born according to the faith 
of his parents, but not spiritually, because no one ex- 
cept Christ has ever been born free from inbred sin. 
Therefore his being '« born after the Spirit 1 ' has no 
reference to regeneration of heart. 

All that transpired in reference to the supernatural 
physical birth of Isaac, came to pass in order to furnish 
an allegorical representation of the spiritual birth, or 
regeneration of heart that should be experienced by the 
children of God under the new covenant. 

In carrying out this figure, let it be observed : that as 
Abraham was a husband to both the bond woman and 
the free, according to the flesh ; so likewise God was a 
spiritual husband, or a husband according to the Spirit, 
to both covenants ; (or to the children under both cov- 
enants.) 

Abraham had bondchildren, according to the flesh, by 
the bondwoman. That is, Ishmael was in legal bond- 
age as a servant, according to the position of his mother. 

By the free woman he had free children according to 
the flesh. That is, Isaac was legally free from the bond* 
age of servant, according to the position of his mother. 

God, as a husband according to the Spirit, or spirit- 
ually, had bond children according to the Spirit or spirit- 
ually ', by the covenant of bondage. That is, they were 
not free from inbred sin, or the " law of sin and death." 

By the free or gospel covenant, He has free children 



60 Allegorical Explanaiion of the Covenants. 

according to the Spirit or spiritually. That is, they are 
free from inbred sin, or the " law of sin and death." 

Thus in fleshly or material things, Abraham was a fig- 
urative representation of God in spiritual things. 

And this figurative representation of spiritual by ma- 
terial things is seen in the offering up of Isaac. For as 
Abraham offered up Isaac his only begotten son as a sac- 
rifice unto God, so God offered up His only begotten Son, 
as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. 

As has been previously noticed, Abraham could not 
have children by the free woman until after the promise 
of a son by Sarah was fulfilled. So neither could God 
have children by the free, or gospel covenant, until after 
the promise of the covenant was fulfilled by the shed 
blood of Christ. 

God must have free children, by the free covenant. 
They must be spiritually free. That is, free from inbred 
sin. 

This freedom would make them natural instead of 
adopted children. They would be like God — " conform- 
ed to the image of his Son. n 

Man was created, morally, in the image of God. The 
law of God was the law of his heart. He was alive to 
God, and dead to sin. 

When he sinned, he lost the moral image of God, and 
became dead to God, and alive to sin. 

The law of sin was the law of his heart. Inbred sin, 
the image of the devil, took the place of the lost image 
of God. 

Inbred sin must be destroyed, or taken away, before 



Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 61 

the image of God could be restored, and the sinner be- 
came a natural or free child of God. 

Now inasmuch as the " strength of sin is the taw, sin 
could not be destroyed, or taken away, until the de- 
mands of the law were met. Christ must suffer the 
penalty of the broken moral law, which was death, be- 
fore inbred sin could be destroyed. Hence, God could 
not have free or natural children until the broken moral 
law was satisfied by the death of Christ. 

No one could be born of the Spirit, or bear the image 
of the last Adam, Christ, until the image of the Devil, 
inbred sin, was destroyed by the offering of Christ. 

For by one offering he hath perfected forever 
them them that are sanctified. — Heb. 10: 14. 

That is, them that are cleansed from inbred sin. Such 
are the children of the free, or gospel covenant. Such 
have experienced the new birth, according to the New- 
covenant promise : "I will put my laio in their inward 
parts, and write it in their hearts" 

Such have followed Christ " in the regeneration," and 
are the seed referred to in the following language : 

When thou shalt make his soul an offering 
for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong 
his days, and the ^pleasure of the Lord shall 
prosper in his hand. 

He shall see of the travail of his soul, and 
shall be satisfied. — Isa. 53: 10-11. 

That is, Christ shall see sons born in His own image 
— His natural seed, or children. 



62 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 

The covenant of promise being now ratified by the 
blood of Christ, as described in the fifty-third chapter, 
the hitherto barren covenant, represented by Sarah in 
her barren state, now becomes fruitful; and the Holy 
Ghost in the fifty- fourth chapter, describes the covenant 
in its fruitful state, as represented by Sarah after she be- 
came a mother of children : 

Sing, barren, thou that didst not bear; 
break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou 
that didst not travail with child : for more are 
the children of the desolate than the children 
of the married wife, saith the Lord. 

Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them 
stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations : 
spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen 
thy stakes ; 

For thou shalt break forth on the right hand 
and on the left ; and thy seed shall inherit the 
G-entiles, and make the desolate cities to be in- 
habited. 

Fear : not for thou shalt not be ashamed : 
neither be thou confounded ; for thou shalt not 
be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the 
the shame of thy youth, and shall aot remember 
the reproach of thy widowk)od any more. 

For thy Maker is thine husband ; The Lord 
of hosts is his name ; and thy Redeemer the Holy 
One of Israel; The God of the whole earth 
shall he be called. 

For the Lord shall call thee as a woman for- 



Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 63 

saken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, 
when thou wast refused, saith thy God. — Isa. 54 : 
1-6. 

That this language is a description of the gospel cov- 
enant, after its ratification by the blood of Christ, as 
compared with its desolation and unfrnitfulness, or bar- 
renness before it was ratified, is proved by Gal. 4: 24-31, 
already referred to. 

The sense in which God, in Christ, was a husband, 
spiritually, to the bondwoman, or the old-covenant 
church, is seen in the following Scriptures : 

And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 

And did all drink the same spiritual drink ; 
For they drank of that spiritual Rock that fol- 
lowed them ; and that Rock was Christ. — 1 Cor. 
10:3-4. 

As I understand it, the spiritual meat and drink here 
spoken pf are the spiritual blessings granted to the peo- 
ple of God through Christ, as figuratively represented 
by the manna that followed them, and the water that 
came from the rock in Horeb. 

Christ was the spiritual Bock that followed them, or 
was with them. That is, He was with them, or followed 
them, instead of being in them. 

As a husband, spiritually, to this bondwoman, the 
old-covenant church, He was with the church, to inspire, 
guide, instruct, and to be a present help in every time of 
need. But there was not that nearness or union exist- 
ing between Christ and the bond woman, that there is 
between Christ and the free woman. This difference of 



64 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 

relation is figuratively represented by the difference of 
relation existing between Abraham and his two wives. 
There was not that nearness or union existing between 
Abraham and the bondwife, that there was between him 
and his free wife. 

The difference of relation existing between Christ and 
the old and new-covenant churches (as figuratively 
represented by the difference of relation existing between 
Abraham and his two wives) is shown by the expres- 
sion, "followed them." 

He could not dwell in the old-covenant church, be- 
cause its members could not be cleansed from indwell- 
ng sin, or corruption. 

They were pardoned, but not sanctified. "The strength 
of sin being the law" the body of sin could not be de- 
stroyed until the law was satisfied by the death of 
Christ. He, by whose stripes they could be healed, must 
be smitten before they could be made whole. For this rea- 
son it is said He, (Christ, the spiritual Rock,) "followed 
them." 

On the same principle, (but not for the same reason,) 
God said in reference to the children of Israel : 

For I will not go up in the midst of thee ; 
for thou art a stiff-necked people : lest I con- 
sume thee in the way.— Exod. 33: 3. 

Christ was with them, and the Spirit was freely given, 
as shown by the waters from the Rock, the streams of 
which " ran down like rivers." 

He came to them by water only, as shown by the 
smitten Rock in Horeb. He must come by water and 






Allegokical Explanation of the Covenants. 65 

blood, before inbred sin could be taken away, and the 
heart made a fit temple in which for Him to dwell. 

This is he that came by water and blood , 
even Jesus Christ ; not by water only, but by 
water and blood. — 1 John 5 : 6. 

As I understand it, ' to come by water,' 1 does not mean 
baptism, as some of our commentators have explained 
this coming of Christ. 

Baptism was only an ordinance to be fulfilled as an 
indication, or outward sign, of the pardon of sins. 

It became Christ to fulfill this righteous ordinance, 
the same as it became Him to be subject to His parents, 
in order to fulfill a righteous law. 

His baptism was not a witness that He was the Son of 
God, any more than His circumcision, or His subjection 
to His parents. 

It was the Spirit that bore witness that Jesus was the 
Son of God. saying, " This is my beloved son in whom I 
am well pleased." 

Water, as a symbol of the way or manner in which 
Christ came, was a witness. Blood, as a symbol of the 
way or manner in which He comes, is a witness. 

Both of these symbols of His manner of coming were 
manifested at His crucifixion. 

The blood and the water that came from His side 
were symbolical indications, or witnesses, that He had 
come in the way or manner indicated by these symbols. 

He came by water only, to the old-covenant church, 
as indicated by the smitten Rock in Horeb. At his cru- 
5 



66 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants, 

cifixion, He came by water and blood also, as indicated 
by the water and blood that came from His side. 

The water and the blood, as symbolical witnesses, co- 
incide with the Spirit, in Christ: but these symbols 
were not His coming. 

As I understand it, to come by water, was to confer 
those blessings of which ivater was a symbol. 

To come by blood, was to confer that blessing of 
which blood is a symbol. 

In the Bible, water is used as a symbol of the Spirit. 
And it is used in cleansing, or washing away filth or 
dirt. 

Therefore, to come by water, was to come by the Spir- 
it, as water to the thirsty. 

To come by the Spirit to those that were filthy by 
transgression, was as water to the filth of the body. It 
washed away their transgressions. 

To ' come by ivater? therefore, was the sense in which 
God, in Christ, was a husband, spiritually to the old-cov- 
enant church, or Hagar, the bondwoman. 

Blood is the life of the body, and is therefore used as 
a symbol of the life of the soul. 

Therefore to come by blood, was to restore life to the 
dead soul. 

The blood of Christ takes away inbred sin, and makes 
the worshiper a " new creature," by restoring the " law 
of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." 

Therefore, to come by water and blood also, is the 
sense in which God, in Christ, is a husband to the new- 
covenant church, or Sarah, the free woman. 



Allegokical Explanation of the Covenants. 67 

This sense is explained by Christ, as follows : 

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, 1 
say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the 
Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no 
life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drink- 
eth my blood, hath eternal life ; and I will raise 
him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat 
indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that 
eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth 
in me, and I in him. — Mat. 6: 53-56. 

That is, he that so believes in the offering of the body 
of Christ, as to experience that change of heart Wuich 
the offering was intended to accomplish, has eternal life. 
Christ dwells in him. 

Christ in the heart is the bread of life. 

Siys Christ, I am the bread of life— verse 48. 
I am the living bread which came down from 
heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he shall 
live forever: and the bread that I will give is 
my flesh, which I will give for the life of the 
world — verse 51. 

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I 
say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread 
from heaven ; but my Father giveth you the 
true bread from heaven. For the bread of God 
is he which came down from heaven, and giveth 
.life unto the world — verses 32-33. 

That is, Moses gave you not Christ in the heart. 
Christ, through Moses, came to them by water only. 



68 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 

The blood of Christ, which restores life to the soul by 
the destruction of inbred sin, had not then beeu shed. 
For that reason Moses could not give them the ''true 
bread from heaven" or Christ in the heart. Christ and 
inbred sin could not dwell in the heart at the same time. 
The life of which the blood of Christ was a symbol, 
could not be given until that blood was shed. 

Christ must first come, before the life consequent upon 
the destruction of inbred sin could be imparted. 

The coming of Christ by blood, is the bread which 
Moses did not give, and is the sense in which Christ is a 
husband, spiritually, to the new-covenant church, or the 
free woman. 

Let it be observed that the law existing between ser- 
vant and master is made use of to represent the law of 
inbred sin; and that Ishmael was a representative of 
the children of the old covenant, and Isaac of the new. 

As Ishmael was the son of a servant, the bondwoman, 
he was a servant only, and as such ceuld not be heir to 
Abraham's possessions. 

Isaac was the son of a free woman, and therefore not 
a servant. 

Because he was not a servant but a so?i t he could be 
heir to Abraham's possessions. 

Abraham's worldly possessions, represent the inherit- 
ance in Christ. 

Now as Isaac was an heir to Abraham's worldly pos- 
sessions, (because he was a son of the free woman,) 
this heirship to a worldly inheritance represents the heir- 



Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 69 

ship of the children of the new covenant to the inherit- 
ance in Christ. 

The children of the new covenant are free from the 
law of inbred sin, and can therefore come in possession 
of the inheritance in Christ, just as Isaac was free from 
the law of a servant, and could therefore come in pos- 
session of Abraham's worldly possessions. 

The children of the old covenant could not be free 
from the law of inbred sin, and could not therefore 
come in possession of the inheritance in Christ, just as 
Ishmael could not be free from the law of a servant 
and could not therefore come in possession of Abra- 
* ham's worldly possessions. 

Ishmael was born in a natural way, or according to 
the flesh ; that is he was not physically born according 
to promise. 

This shows that the children of the old covenant could 
not be spiritually born according to promise. 

They could be adopted, by the pardon of sins, and 
treated as adopted children, but could not experience 
the new birth consequent upon the destruction of inbred 
sin. They could not experience the " adoption of sons" 
or the '-soiship." (That is, the slate of being a son by 
birth.) 

They were heirs to the new birth, or natural sonship, 
but could not come in posssesion of it until they could 
be freed from the law of inbred sin. 

They occupied the position of servants, with refer- 
ence to the inheritance in Christ, just as Ishmael occu- 



70 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 

pied the position of a servant in reference to Abraham's 
worldly possessions. 

This relation of the children of the old covenant to 
the promised inheritance in Christ, is again explained 
by another similar figure, taken again from the rela- 
tionship existing in the family. It is the position of a 
child, while in a state of nonage, with reference to his 
father's possessions. 

Now T say, that the heir, as long as he is a 
child, (while in his nonage,) " differeth nothing 
from a servant, though he be lord of all; 

But is under tutors and governors until the 
time appointed of the father. 

Even so we, when we were children, (that is, 
when we were under the law,) were in bondage 
under the elements of the world : (That is, 
under the law of the carnal mind, in which the 
world is held, or bound.) 

But when the fulness of time was come, God 
sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made 
under the law, 

To redeem them that were under the law, 
that we might receive the adoption of sons. * * 

Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a 
son.— Gal. 4: 1-7. 

That is, thou art no more a child of the old covenant, 
or the bondwoman ; but thou art a child of the new 
covenant, or the free woman, and a child of promise, 
spiritually, as Isaac was a child of promise, physically. 
Thou art born, spiritually, after the similitude of Isaac's 



Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 71 

physical birth. Thou art Abraham's spiritual Isaac. 
Thou art born spiritually, according to the new-cove- 
nant promise, as Isaac was born physically, according 
to the promise made to Abraham. 

Thou art a son. That is, a natural, instead of an 
adopted son, or servant. 

All the children of God under the old covenant, are, 
by the above scriptures, counted as servants, compared 
with the children of the new covenant, because they 
were in bondage, under the elements of the world ; that 
is, under the law of the carnal mind. 

The covenant from Mount Sinai gendered to bondage. 
It bore children that were in bondage to inbred sin ; the 
outward token or sign of which was the law of ordi- 
nances from which they could not be free. 

The casting out of the son of the bondwoman from 
being heir to Abraham's worldly possessions, is made 
use of also, to show, figuratively, that all under the 
new covenant who depend on works for salvation, in- 
stead of faith in the promises of God, are in the bondage 
of sin, and cannot be Abraham's spiritual seed. That 
is, they cannot bo born spiritually, after the similitude 
of Isaac's physical birth. They cannot be the " chil- 
dren of promise." 

They are servants, and not sons, because they are not 
freed from inbred sin ; and as such cannot come in pos- 
session of the inheritance in Christ, any more than Ish- 
mael could come in possession of Abraham's worldly 
possessions. 

They have not, therefore, experienced the New Birth 
or Sanctification. 



CHAPTER IX. 



The bondage of the old covenant. 

But before faith came, were kept under the 
law, shut up unto the faith which should after- 
ward be revealed. — Gal. 3: 23. 

To be " kepi under the law, shut up unto the faith ivhich 
should afterward be revealed" means to be guarded, 
bound, or locked up as in prison, with no way or means 
of becoming free. This is the meaning of the words 
rendered " kept," and "shut." So also in the twenty- 
second verse : But the Scriptures hath concluded all un- 
der sin. In this verse, the word rendered " concluded," 
has the same origin and the same meaning as the one 
rendered "shut," in the twenty-third verse. " The 
Scriptures hath concluded ; " that is, shut or locked all up 
under sin. 

By sin, in this verse, is not meant the sin of trans- 
gression, or that all were sinners by transgression, and 
that therefore they were shut or locked up under the 
guilt of transgression. For, under the old covenant, or 
before faith came, pardon was offered to all who com- 
plied with the conditions of the covenant. 



Bondage of the Old Covenant. 73 

To be shut or locked up under sin means the same as 
to be shut, or locked up under the law till faith came. 
Neither of these expressions mean that no one could be 
freed from guilt until after faith came. 

As I understand it, to be concluded, that is , shut or 
locked up under sin, means to be shut or locked up under 
the law of inbred sin. 

To be "kept under the lata, shut up unto the faith 
ivhich should afterward be revealed" means the same 
thing, with the exception that the law of ordinances is 
mcluded, as a law under ivhich they were shut or locked 
up. 

But the law of ordinances did not constitute the bond- 
age that is meant by the shutting or locking up referred 
to in these Scriptures. The bondage of the old covenant 
did not consist, primarily, in the cords that bound ♦ 
(that is, the law of ordinances,) but in a law lying back 
of the law of ordinances, namely: the law of inbred 
sin. 

God did not give His people, under the old covenant, 
a * hand-writing of ordinances that was against them, 
which was contrary to them, and then take it out of the 
way ; except on the ground of necessity. 

The necessity was the law of inbred sin, from which 
they could not be free till faith came. 

The law of inbred sin, or the carnal mind, being un- 
taken away, was against or contrary to the moral law, 
and consequently against them in keeping the moral law, 
And as the law of ordinances was a necessary concomi- 
tant of inbred sin, this law of ordinances was also against 



74: Bondage of the Old Covenant. 

or contrary to them. It would have been uesless and 
burdensome could they have been freed from inbred 
sin 

But inbred sin must be guarded, and kept under prop- 
er check and control by some suitable law. The law of 
ordinances was just that law. It kept the worshiper in 
the way God w®uld have him walk, by pointing him 
to Christ. He was thus kept from idolary, and led to 
trust in Christ for redemption. It was a school-master 
to bring him to Christ. 

Its offerings were typical of the offering of Christ ; 
and the law in regard to these offerings must be strictly 
adhered to, or the worshiper was not accepted in the 
sight of God. 

In every complete offering for sin, there was some- 
thing typical of the offering of Christ. It pointed to 
Christ, and the worshiper was thereby enabled to keep 
Christ in view, and by faith in Him be justified, and ac- 
cepted in the sight of God. Christ must be kept in 
view. This was accomplished by the offerings pre- 
scribed by law, and the worshiper was enabled to take 
hold on Christ by a faith that was counted to him for 
righteousness. 

The law, or " hand-writing of ordinances," must 
therefore be faithfully observed, or Christ was not 
brought to view, and the worshiper could not die in 
the faith that was acceptable in the sight of God. He 
could have no title to the promised inheritance in 
Christ, namely : * ' The perfection of them that are sanc- 
tified:' 



Bondage of the Old Covenant. 75 

If he kept the law of ordinance faithfutly, he died in 
the faith that obtained for him a good report, but could 
not receive the promise. That is, he could not receive 
the sonship, or redemption from under the law of in- 
bred sin. For this, he must wait until the " fulness of 
time was come. 1 ' 

He was thus "kept under the law, shut up unto the faith 
which should afterward be revealed" 

Inbred sin bound him, or locked him up, as in prison, 
under its power, and made it necessary for him to ob- 
serve the law of ordinances as a means of justification, 
and consequent preservation, until the gospel dispensa- 
tion, or "faiths' 1 came. 

To be shut or locked up under the power of inbred sin, 
means that the worshiper could not be free from it. 

It does not mean that he was compelled to commit all 
manner of wickedness. It does not mean that the " old 
man," the " body of sin" could not be kept under sub- 
jection so that the worshiper could be free from guilt. 

It means that he could not be free from a law in his 
members, that warred against the " law of the Spirit of 
life in Christ Jesus" 

While thus in bondage to inbred sin, he could serve not 
in " newness of spirit, 1 ' but his service was according 
to the " oldness of the letter." It was not natural for 
the heart to keep the law of God, and worship Him in 
Spirit and in truth. It was a forced, and not a natural 
service. 

Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them 



76 Bondage of the Old Covenant. 

that know the law,) how that the law hath do- 
minion over a man so long as he liveth? 

For the woman which hath a husband is 
bound by the law to her husband so long as he 
liveth; but it her husband be dead, she is 
loosed from the law of her husband. 

So then if, while her husband liveth, she be 
married to another man, she shall be called an 
adulteress : but if her husband be dead, she is 
free from that law ; so that she is no adulteress, 
though she be married to another man. 

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become 
dead to the law by the body of Christ ; that ye 
should be married to another, even to him who 
is raised from the dead, that we should bring 
forth fruit unto God. 

For when we were in the flesh, the motions 
of sins, which were by the law, did work in our 
members, to bring forth fruit unto death. 

But now we are delivered from the law, that 
being dead wherein we were held ; that we 
should serve in newness of spirit, and not in 
the oldness of the letter. — Rom. 7 : 1-6. 

That is, the law held dominion over the worshiper as 
long as it was in force, or until he was dead to the law 
by the body of Christ, just as the law existing between 
husband and wife, binds the wife until the husband is 
dead. 

He must be dead to the law before he could be free 



Bondage of the Old Covenant. 77 

from it, just as the husband must be dead before the 
wife could be free from the law that bound her to her 
husband. 

Now to become dead to the law by the body of Christ 
was to be freed from sin. The body of Christ must slay 
inbred sin, before the worshiper could be dead to the 
law. 

For he that is dead is freed from sin. — Rom. 
6:7. 

That is, he in whom the " old man " is dead is freed 
from sin. 

The sixth verse reads : 

Knowing this, that our old man is crucified 
with him, that the body of sin might be de- 
stroyed, that henceforth we should not serve 
sin. 

That is, he in whom the "old man" is crucified, is 
dead to sin— is freed from it. The body of sin is de- 
stroyed, and he is said to be dead, according to the 
seventh verse : For he that is dead is freed from sin. 

These Scriptures show plainly what is referred to as 
being dead, in the sixth verse of the seventh chapter. 

But now we are delivered from the law, that 
being dead wherein we were held. 
The fifth verse reads : 

But when we were in the flesh," (that is, be- 
fore the body of sin was destroyed,) " the mo- 
tions of sin, which were by the law, did work 
in our members to bring forth fruit unto death." 



78 Bondage of the Old Covenant, 

It is then added : " But now tve are delivered from the 
law, that being dead wherein we were held.''' 1 

It was the "old man" that held, or bound. It was 
the " old man," or the " body of sin," that was dead. 

This death of the " old man," or inbred sin, delivered 
the worshiper from the law of ordinances, just as the 
wife was freed from the law of her husband by his 
death. 

As has been previously noticed, the law of ordinances 
was a necessary, and not an arbitrary rule ; and when 
inbred sin, (that which made the law of ordinances 
necessary,) was removed, the worshiper was delivered 
from the law. He was dead to the law. 

What is meant, therefore, by the bondage of the old 
covenant, is the bondage of inbred sin, from which the 
worshiper could not be freed except by the body of 
Christ. That is, the offering of the body of Christ de- 
livered the worshiper from the law of ordinances, by 
destroying inbred sin. 

The worshiper was married to the law of ordinances, 
and could not be freed from that relation, and married 
to Christ until the body of Christ had slain inbred sin, 
and thereby rendered him dead to the law of ordinances. 

The last part of the fifth, the sixth, seventh, and the 
first part of the eighth chapters of Romans, Paul devotes 
to the subject of inbred sin. 

In the fifth, he shows its origin, and several times calls 
it the " offense" 

In the sixth, he shows the way of deliverance from it : 



Bondage of the Old Covenant. 79 

namely, baptism into the death of Christ, and calls it 
the " old man,'' and the " body of sin." 

In the first part of the seventh, he shows how long 
inbred sin was to have dominion over the worshiper, 
and uses the term law, instead of sin. as in the four- 
teenth verse of the sixth chapter. 

In the last part of the seventh chapter, he describes 
the workings of inbred sin, as brought to life, or put in 
motion by the moral law, and then adds, verse 24; 

wretched man that I am ! who shall deliv- 
er me from the body of this death ? 

In describing the motions of inbred sin, he calls it 
-' sin that dwelleth in me" and " the body of this death." 

In the eighth chapter Paul closes this argument in 
regard to inbred sin, in the following language : 

There is therefore now no condemnation to 
them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not 
after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ 
Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin 
and death. 

For what the law could not do, in that it was 
weak through the flesh, God sending his own 
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, 
condemned sin in the flesh : 

That the righteousness of the law might be 
fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but 
after the Spirit, — verses 1-4. 



80 Bondage of the Old Covenant. 

To be made free from the " law of sin and death," by 
the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus " is to ex- 
perience the New Birth, or Banctification. 



CHAPTER X. 



Addition and office of the ceremonial laiv. 

Wherefore then serveth the law? It was 
added because of transgressions, till the seed 
should come to whom the promise was made. — 
Gal. 3 : 19. 

To use a figure, the moral law was like a steel spring, 
holding the transgressor in the unyielding vise of its 
own inflexible justice. It held him under condemna- 
tion. 

The ceremonial law acted as a temporary lever, lift- 
ing the force of the spring from off the transgressor for 
the time being. 

It was a means of justification or pardon, whereby 
the guilt of transgression was removed, and the trans- 
gressor brought into favor with God. 

He was thereby accepted of God, as free from the 
guilt of transgression. 

The offerings of the ceremonial law made an atone- 
ment for transgression on the ground of faith in Christ. 
The faith of the transgressor must reach Christ through 
these offerings. 
6 



82 Office of the Ceremonial Law. 

The transgressor could be pardoned on the ground of 
a perfect offering, and the exercise of a perfect faith in 
Christ, vouchsafed through said offering. That is, the 
offerings of the law were designed to bring the trans- 
gressor to Christ through faith. The law was a " school- 
master " to bring him to Christ. 

An imperfect offering showed an imperfect faith, as in 
the case of Cain. 

The faith of the transgressor must fasten on Christ, in 
order to secure pardon. If the offerings of the law did 
not bring him to Christ by faith, they were of no avail. 

The offering of Christ was the only foundation, or 
procuring cause of forgiveness under the old covenant. 
By virtue of the offering of Christ, and through faith in 
said offering, God accepted of the offerings of the law, 
as an atonement for transgressions, until the debt of the 
transgressor could be cancelled by the offering of Christ. 

Guilt was removed for the time being, (for they were 
pardoned,) but had Christ failed to die, the guilt of the 
transgressor would have returned upon him in full force, 
and the offerings of the law would have been of no avail. 

And for this cause he is the mediator of the 
new testament, that by means of death, for the 
redemption of the transgressions that were un- 
der the first testament they which are called 
might receive the promise of eternal inherit- 
ance. — Heb. 9 : 15. 

The end or object of Christ's mediatorial office, as 



Office of the Cekemonial Law. 83 

mediator of the new covenant, is to purge the con- 
science from dead works. His blood alone could do 
this. 

" That by means of death for the redemption of the 
transgressions that were under the first testament, they 
having been called," (instead of "they which are 
called,") " might receive the promise of eternal inherit- 
ance" 

Christ's death was the only means whereby the trans- 
gressor, under the old covenant, could be redeemed 
from the consequences of transgression. 

The consequences of transgression were, first, guilt. 
From the guilt of transgression he was freed by the 
offerings of the ceremonial law, because thereby he 
could reach Christ. 

Secondly, inbred sin was an effect of transgression. 
Fr >m this, the transgressor could not be free until the 
blood of Christ was shed. 

The purging of the conscience, (or the " inmost soul, 11 
as the word rendered conscience sometimes means,) by 
the blood of Christ, is the " eternal inheritance " referred 
to, as being promised to those that were called under 
the old covenant. 

There was a will or testament specified in the cove- 
nant of promise. That will contained the promise of 
" eternal inheritance" which, they that were called were 
to receive on the death of the testator, Christ. 

The ' purging of the conscience from dead works, 1 
and the '• eternal inheritance," are one and the same, 
and mean the destruction of inbred sin. 



84 Office of the Ceremonial Law. 

This is what was meant by the fulfillment of the new- 
covenant promise : " I will put my law in their inward 
parts, and write it in their hearts." 

The same thing is meant by the expression: " The 
adoption of sons." The word rendered " adoption of 
sons,' 1 ' 1 should here be rendered sonship ; that is, the 
state Of boing a son by birth. 

Now this sonship is the same as the " eternal inherit- 
ance;" and is that which was promised by the- will, or 
testament, contained in the covenant of promise. 

This will or testament was to take effect after the 
death of the testator, Christ. 

The law that governed this will, or testament, is ex- 
plained by referring to the law governing the testamen- 
tary disposition of property among men. 

The disposition of property by will and testament was 
practiced at an early date among civilized nations. 

The essential meaning, or correct definition of a " last 
will and testament," has been given, as "a disposition 
of one's property, to take effect after death" Death gave 
the will and testament its force. It was never in force 
until after the death of the testator. 

This law that governs the disposition of property in 
the ''last will and testament," is what Paul refers to, to 
explain the law by which the promisee, under the old 
covenant, was to come in possession of the promised, 
and " eternal inheritance." 

For where a testament is, there must also of 
necessity be the death of the testator. 



Office of the Ceremonial Law. 85 

For a testament is of force after men are 
dead : otherwise it is of no strength at all while 
the testator liveth.— Heb. 9: 16-17. 

That the benefits of the covenant of promise were not 
secured to the promisee until after the death of Christ, is 
still further explained and established, by referring to 
the fact that the benefits of the old covenant were not 
secured except through the blood of appropriate vic- 
tims. The old covenant was made valid, and the prom- 
ised benefits thereof secured by the shedding of blood. 

Whereupon neither the first testament was 
dedicated without blood. 

For when Moses had spoken every precept 
to all the people according to the law, he took 
the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and 
scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both 
the book and all the people, 

Saying, this is the blood of the testament 
which God hath enjoined on you. 

Moreover he sprinkled likewise with blood 
both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the 
ministry. 

And almost all things are by the law purged 
with blood; and without shedding of blood is 
no remission. 

It was therefore necessary that the patterns 
of the things in the heavens should be purged 
with these ; but the heavenly things them- 
selves with better sacrifices than these. — Heb. 
9:18-23. 



86 Office of the Ceremonial Law. 

By the offerings of the ceremonial law, the worshiper 
was freed from the guilt of transgression, and at the 
same time pointed to Christ, as the only offering by 
which the conscience could be purged, or the heart 
cleansed from all sin. 

But for this purging of the conscience, or the heart 
from inbred sin, he must wait until the offering of Christ 
was made, as the worshiper under the new covenant 
waits for the redemption of the body. 

The office of the ceremonial law was represented by 
the Scapegoat: — " Azazel" the averter. It averted, or 
turned away the force of the moral law, by averting or 
turning away the immediate penalty of transgression. 

By its observance, the worshiper was kept in a justi- 
fied state, until he could experience the New Birth, 
promised upon the death of Christ. " It was added be- 
cause of transgressions, till the seed should come to ivhom 
the promise was made." 



CHAPTER XI. 



Justification by the works of the law. 

Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall 
no flesh be justified in his sight : for by the 
law is the knowledge of sin. — Rom, 3: 20. 

As I understand this verse, and other similar passages, 
they do not mean that no man could be justified in the 
sight of God, in the sense of pardon and acceptance, by 
the keeping of the law, for, " the man that doeth them 
shall live in them.'''' But the meaning is this: no man 
by keeping the law of the old covenant could be made 
holy in the sense of being freed from all sin. He could 
not be cleansed from all unrighteousness in the inward 
parts by the blood of Christ. 

The word justified, in the above quotation, and in 
other places in the Bible, is a relative term only, having 
various standards by which its signification is deter- 
mined, Thus : 

But wisdom is justified of her children. — 
Mat. 11:19. 

For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and 



88 Justification by the Works of the Law. 

by thy words thou shalt be condemned. — Mat. 
12:37. 

To be justified in the sense of pardon and acceptance 
with God, under the old covenant, was to keep the law of 
that covenant. 

Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my 
judgments : which if a man do, he shall live in 
them. — Lev. 18: 5. 

But as the old covenant did not require righteousness 
in the inward parts, the man who kept the law of that 
covenant only, could not be considered justified, or 
righteous in the sense of righteousness in the inward 
parts, and consequently in the sight of God, whose 
moral purity required such righteousness. 

God accepted of those who kept the law of the old 
covenant, because it was all that they could do: but as 
the keeping of the law of the old covenant did not come 
up to the standard of righteousness, which God looks 
upon as righteous, (namely, righteousness in the inward 
parts,) it is said : " Therefore by the deeds of the law 
shall no flesh be justified in his sight.' ' 

It is not said that they were not justified in the sense 
of pardon and acceptance with God, because this would 
contradict the whole tenor of the Old-Testament Scrip- 
tures on the subject of forgiveness. 

To be justified in the eyes of the law of the old cove- 
nant, required one standard of righteousness. 

To be justified in the eyes of the moral law, or in the 
sight of God, required another standard of righteousness. 



Justification by the Works of the Law. 89 

And all that is said in the Bible, in reference to the in- 
sufficiency of the law to make perfect, or to justify in 
the sight of God, is said in reference to the latter stand- 
ard of righteousness. 

For Moses describeth the righteousness 
which is of the law, That the man which doeth 
those things shall live by them, 

But the righteousness which is of faith 
speaketh on this wise, say not in thine heart, 
Who shall ascend into heaven ? that is to bring 
Christ down from above : 

Or, who shall descend into the deep ? that is, 
to bring up Christ again from the dead. 

But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, 
even in thy mouth, and in thy heart : that is, 
the word of faith, which we preach. — Rom. 10 : 
5-8. 

Now the righteousness which was of the law, was by 
faith ; but the righteousness which was by the faith of 
the old covenant, was different from the righteousness 
which is by the faith of the new covenant. 

The faith of the old covenant took away the guilt or 
condemnation, that came upon the transgressor on ac- 
count of his transgression of the law of that covenant. 
It justified him in view of the standard of righteousness 
required by the old cjovenant, and was all that God re- 
quired of him. 

But the faith of the new covenant takes hold on Christ 
as a sanctifier, and takes away inbred sin, or " purges 



90 Justification by the Works of the Law. 

the conscience from dead works," and justifies the wor- 
shiper in the sight of the moral law, or in God's sight. 

And by him, (Christ,) all that believe are 
justified from all things, from which ye could 
not be justified by the law of Moses. — Acts 13 
39. 

By the law of Moses, the worshiper could be justified 
from all things except inbred sin. 

All, under the new covenant, who believe in Christ as 
a sanctifier, can be justified or cleansed from inbred sin, 
from which no one could be justified or cleansed by the 
faith of the old covenant. 

They can experience the New Birth, or Sanctification. 



CHAPTER XII. 

The sonship, or state of being a son by birth. 

The word rendered adoption signifies the act by which 
a child is taken out of one family, and incorporated with 
another. A child thus taken into another family, or 
under the care and protection of one who is not its real 
parent, by a legal process in law, is said to be an adopt- 
ed child. A stranger child thus taking the place of one 
who is a child by birth, and made an heir to its adoptive 
parent's estate, is an adopted child in the primary and 
literal sense of the word adoption. 

But this is not the meaning of the word rendered 
adoption, as used in the Bible, with one exception: 
namely, Rom. 9 : 4. In this place, the word is used in 
its proper sense. 

In Bom. 8 : 23, the word rendered adoption is ex- 
plained as meaning the redemption of the body. 

With these two exceptions, as used in the Bible, it 
means sonship, or the state of being a son by birth. 

Under the old covenant, the children of God were in 
bondage to inbred sin, and consequently could not be 
the children of God by birth ; but were adopted children. 



92 The Sonship. 

By virtue of their adoption they were entitled to the 

sonship, or the state of being a son by birth, in due time 

Hence, the following Scripture : 

But when the fulness of time was corae, Goc 
sent forth his son, made of a woman, made un- 
der the law, 

To redeem them that were under the 
that we might receive the adoption of sons.- 
Gal. 4 : 4-5. 

The word rendered adoption in this verse should bo 
rendered sonship ; that is, the state or condition of being 
sons by birth — the new birth. 

All the children of God, under the law, were adopted. 
Hence, they could not receive the adoption, or the state 
of being sons by adoption, when Christ came. But thej 
could receive the sonship at that time. 

They were children by adoption, placed in the condi 
tion of servants, with reference to their adoptive father's 
estate. 

The estate to which they were heirs was the new birth 
or sonship. 

The spiritual condition of the children of God, unde^ 
the old covenant, is explained by the following figure : 

Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is 
child differeth nothing from a servant, though 
he be lord of all ; 

But is under tutors and governors until the 
time appointed of the father. 

Even so we, when we were children, were in 



The Sonship. 93 

Dondage under the elements of the world. — 
Tkii. 4 : 1-3. 

ri Wlien we were children " — when we were under the 
law, and children by adoption. 

Were in bondage under the elements of the world" — 
were in bondage to the law of the carnal mind, under 
which the world is held, or bound. 

The children of God, under the old covenant, were in 
the same condition, spiritually, that the child is in pecu- 
niarily before he becomes of age. 

The child before he is of age, is an heir to his father's 
estate ; but is in bondage, or under tutors and governors, 
and does not come in possess ; on of his father's estate 
any more than a servant. He is not free to use his 
father's estate any more than a servant, although he 
owns it by virtue of his heirship. 

" The time appointed of the father," is the time when 
he becomes of age, and takes possession of his legal in- 
heritance. 

Even so, the children of Gocl under the old covenant, 
were in bondage to the law, or that which made the law 
necessary, inbred sin; and were of course under the ele- 
ments of the world, and could not come in possession of 
the promised inheritance of their father's estate until 
they became of age. 

That is, they could not come in possession of the bless- 
ings conveyed by the "last will and testament" con- 
tained in the new covenant, until they were free from 
th<! law of the old covenant by the death of the testator 
of said " last will and testament." 



94 The Sonship. 

Now Christ is the testator of said " last will and tes- 
tament." 

And for this cause he is mediator of the new 
testament, that by means of death, for the re- 
demption of the transgressions (transgressors) 
that were under the first testament, they which 
are called might receive the promise of eternal 
inheritance. 

For where a testament is, there must also of 
necessity be the death of the testator. 

For a testament is of force after men are 
dead : otherwise it is of no strength at all while 
the testator liveth.— Heb. 9 : 15-17. 

But when the " time appointed of the father " had ar- 
rived, or the " fulness of time was come," and they 
were redeemed from the spiritual bondage belonging to 
the state of adoption, they were no longer in the condi- 
tion of servants, with reference to the promised inherit- 
ance contained in the "last will and testament" of 
their adoptive Father and Testator, Christ. 

They were then sons by birth. They then received 
the sonship. 

Hence, the following Scripture : 

And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth 
the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, 
Abba, Father. 

Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a 
son, and if a son, then an heir of God through 
Christ.— Gal. 4:6-7. 






The Sonship. 95 

The cry of "Abba, Father," did not belong to the 
state of adoption, in the same sense that it does to the 
state of being a son by birth. They were in the condi- 
tion of servants, with reference to the spirit of this cry, 
the same as the child " differeth nothing from a ser- 
vant," with reference to his father's estate, while in his 
nonage. 

There was no blood relation between the Adopter, and 
the child adopted. The blood of Christ only could es- 
tablish this relation. 

In Rom. 8 : 15, the apostle touches the same point, 
and the translators commit the same error in translation. 

Not recognizing the state of adoption as belonging to 
the old-covenant dispensation, and the sonship to the 
new, they substitute the word adoption for sonship. 
They speak of the new birth, or the state of being a son 
by birth, as though it was a state of adoption. 

The believer that is born of God is not adopted. 
There is no adoption about the new birth. 

Believers under the new covenant are not adopted into 
the family, or kingdom of God. They must be bom. 

For ye have not received the spirit of bond- 
age again to fear : but ye have received the 
spirit of adoption, whereby we cry ; Abba, 
Father.— Rom. 8: 15. 

The apostle is here contrasting the spirit of bondage, 
in which there is fear (that is the spirit of adoption, be- 
longing to the old covenant) with the Spirit of the son- 
ship belonging to the new. 

The spirit of bondage belonged to the state of adop- 



96 The Sonship. 

tion, and the cry of " Abba, Father," belongs to the 
sonship. 
Eph. 1:5, reads: 

Having predestinated us unto the adoption of 
children by Jesus Christ to himself. 

Here again we are misled from the meaning of the 
apostle, and of the Holy Spirit, by the translation. 

The word translated adoption should be translated 
sonship. 

An adopted child is not a child by birth. Neither was 
there any predestination to the adoption of children, by 
Jesus Christ. The predestination was to the birth of 
children by Jesus Christ; that is, the sonship. 

The adoption was by the law ; and the sonship by 
Jesus. 

The question may here be asked : " Were there no 
children, by birth, under the law? " 

The following Scripture is the answer : 

And these all, having obtained a good report 
through faith, received not the promise : 

G-od having provided some better thing for 
us, that they without us should not be made 
perfect.— Heb. 11 : 39-40. 

The " better thing " here referred to is the sonship. 

God calls Israel and Ephraim^His "first, born" to ex_| 
press pre-eminence. — Exod. 4: 22, and Jere. 31 : 9. 

The sonship, or the state of being a son by birth, was I 
what made the difference between John the Baptist, and | 
those that are least in the kingdom of heaven. 



The Sonship. 97 

Verily I say unto you, Among them that are 
born of women, there hath not risen a greater 
than John the Baptist : notwithstanding, he that 
is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater 
than he.— Mat. 11: 11. 

The state of being a son by birth, is the kingdom of 
heaven set up in the heart. 

John did not experience this, although " filled with the 
Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb." It did not 
belong to the state of adoption, and could riot be experi- 
enced until Jesus was glorified. 

On Mat. 11 : 11, Wesley has the following note: But 
he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater 
than he— Which an ancient author explains thus: — 
" One perfect in the law as John was, is inferior to one 
who is * baptized into the death of Christ.' For this is 
the kingdom of heaven, even ' to be buried with Christ,' 
and to be 'raised up together with him.' John was 
greater than all who had been then born of women, but 
he was cut off before the kingdom of heaven was 
given." * * * He was blameless as to that ' right- 
eousness which is by the law;' but he fell short of those 
who are perfected by the Spirit of life which is in Christ. 
Whosoever, therefore, is * least in the kingdom of heav- 
en,' by Christian regeneration, is greater than any who 
has attained only to the righteousness of the law, because 
'the law maketh nothing perfect.' 

Although the Holy Ghost was given to John the Bap- 
tist from his birth, and under the old-covenant dispensa- 
tion, "Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the 

7 



98 The Sonship. 

Holy Ghost" yet, as a sanctifier, by whom we receive 
the sonship, or new birth, He was not given until after 
Christ's death. 

As a sanctifier, the " Holy Ghost was not yet given r 
because that Jesus was not yet glorified. 

In His office as a sanctifier, the Holy Ghost is the 
"promise of the father." 

To receive the fulfillment of this promise, is to receive 
the sonship, or the state of being a son by birth — that is, 
the New Birth, or Sanctification. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

Typical signification of the Holy of Holies. 

In the ninth chapter of Hebrews, the apostle gives a 
brief description of the holy and the most holy places, 
(called the first and second tabernacles) in the following 
language : 

Then verily the first covenant had also ordi- 
nances of divine service, and a worldly sanc- 
tuary. 

For there was a tabernacle made ; the first, 
wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and 
the shew- bread; which is called the sanctuary. 

And after the second vail, the tabernacle 
which is called the holiest of all; 

Which had the golden censer, and the ark of 
the covenant overlaid round about with gold, 
wherein was the golden pot that had manna, 
and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of 
the covenant ; 

And over it the cherubim of glory shadowing 
the mercy seat — verses 1-5. 



100 Signification of the Holy of Holies. 

After this description, he adds : 

Now when these thiags were thus ordained, 
the priests went always into the first taberna- 
cle, accomplishing the service of God. 

But into the second went the high priest 
alone once every year, not without blood, which 
he offered for himself, and for the errors of the 
people : 

The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way 
into the holiest of all was not yet made mani- 
fest, while as the first tabernacle was yet stand- 
ing — verses 6-8. 

The apostle gives the above description of the two 
tabernacles, and the services connected with each ; to- 
gether with the signification of the High Priest's en- 
trance into the second tabernacle, in order to explain 
the difference between the blessings, or privileges of the 
two covenants. 

The material things, and carnal ordinances of the 
first covenant, were figures of heavenly or spiritual 
things belonging to the second. 

The true, or heavenly thing prefigured by the Holy of 
Holies, was a heavenly, or spiritual privilege, or state, 
belonging to the new covenant. 

There was a spiritual privilege, or state, peculiar to 
the old-covenant dispensation, of which the first taber- 
nacle was a figure. 

The apostle thus describes this state : which (the first 
tabernacle) was a figure for the time then present, in 



Signification of the Holy of Holies. 101 

which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not 
make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the 
conscience — verse 9. 

The marked peculiarity of the " time then present ," 
was the imperfection of the worshiper, as to his con- 
science. 

The first tabernacle was a figure of this peculiarity. 

Having explained the privilege or state peculiar to 
the worshiper during the " time then present" (which 
lasted till the time of reformation) the apostle proceeds 
to explain the heavenly privilege, or state, belonging to 
the new covenant; and prefigured by the second taber- 
nacle, or Holy of Holies. 

But Christ being come, a high priest of good 
things to come, (or as Clarke translates it) But 
the Christ, the high priest of those good things 
(or services) which were to come, through a 
greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made 
with hands, that is not of the same workman- 
ship, entered once for all into the sanctuary ; 
having obtained eternal redemption for us, not 
by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own 
blood — verses 11-12. 

That is, Christ's entrance into' the "holy place, 11 
(heaven) with His own blood, takes away sin, and per- 
fects the worshiper, as to his conscience. 

For if the blood of bulls and goats, and the 
ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean sanc- 
tifioth to the purifying of the flesh. 

How much more shall the blood of Christ, 



102 Signification of the Holy of Holies. 

who through the eternal Spirit offered himself 
without spot to God, purge your conscience 
from Tead works to serve the living God?— 
verses 13-14. 

This holy or heavenly state, wherein the conscience 
is purged, or the heart is cleansed from all sin, is the 
privilege peculiar to the new covenant, and in the apos- 
tle's argument, is contrasted w th its opposite, which 
was peculiar to the old-covenant dispensation. 

The blood of the first covenant sanctified to the puri- 
fying of the flesh only— that is, the pardon of sins. 

The blood of the second covenant purges the con- 
science from dead works— takes away inbred sin. 
This is the point the apostle is laboring to establish. 
As the first tabernacle was a figure of the " time, then 
present," (that is, the time in, or during which, " both 
gifts and sacrifices were offered that could not make him 
that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the con- 
science'"): so the second tabernacle was a figure of the 
" time of reformation'"— -the time in, or during which, 
the blood of Christ cleanses the heart from all sin. 

This holy state of freedom from inbred sin, is what is 
meant by the " holiest of all,"— verse 8. 

The purging of the conscience from dead works (in- 
bred sin) is the work of the mediatorial office, or priest- 
hood of Christ; and could not be realized until the 
" time of reformation ." 

And for this cause (because His blood 
cleanses the heart) he is mediator of the new 
testament (covenant) that by means of death, 



Signification of the Holy of Holies. 103 

for the redemption of the transgressions (trans- 
gressors) that were under the first testament 
(covenant) they having been called (under the 
old) as well as they which are called (under the 
new) might receive the promise of eternal in- 
heritance — verse 15. 

The "eternal inheritance" is the fulfillment of the 
new-covenant promise, hereafter in the apostle's argu- 
ment, called sanctification ; and also designated by the 
term the " holiest," because prefigured by the " tabernacle 
which is called the holiest of all." 

Having established the priesthood of Christ, at the 
close of the seventh chapter, the apostle keeps the office 
of His priesthood in view, as the principal burden of 

his argument to its close. 

Hence, in the sixth verse of the eighth chapter, he 

says: 

But now hath he obtained a more excellent 

ministry, by how much also he is the mediator 

of a better covenant, which was established 

upon better promises. 

Again — 

For this is the covenant that I will make with 
the house of Israel after those days, saith the 
Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and 
write them in their hearts — verse 10. 

A^aiu-CuoatLMstin^ the blood of Christ's priesthood 
with that of the Levitical)— -he says : 



104 Signification of the Holy of Holies. 

How much more shall the blood of Christ* * 
# # * p Ur ge your conscience from dead works ? 
—chap. 9 : 16. 

Again — (contrasting the prototypes of the Levitical 
priesthood with the heayenly things typified) — he says : 

It was therefore necessary that the patterns 
of things in the heavens should be purified with 
these ; but the heavenly things themselves 
with better sacrifices than these. 

For Christ is not entered into the holy places 
made with hands, which are the figures of the 
true ; but into lieaven itself, now to appear in 
the presence of God for us — verses 23-24. 

As the high priest entered within the second vail, with 
the blood of the first covenant ; to appear before God in 
behalf of the people, that they might be " sanctified to 
the purifying of the flesh ; 15 so Christ entered into heaven 
with his own blood, " now to appear in the presence of 
God" not only for the pardon of sins ; but for our sanc- 
tification. 

Again — ■ 

But now once in the end of the world hath 
he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of 
himself — verse 26. 

Again— (After showing the utter inefficacy of the 
offerings of the law, to purge the worshiper from sin)— 
he adds : 

Wherefore, when he cometh into the world, 
he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst 



Signification of the Holy of Holies. 105 

not, but a body hast thou prepared me — chap- 
ter 10: 5. 

That is, my body is efficacious. 

Again— (contrasting the offices of the two priesthoods) 
— he adds : 

In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou 
hast had no pleasure. 

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the 

book it is written of me) to do thy will, 0, God. 

* •* •* 

By the which will we are sanctified through 
the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once 
for all. * * * 

For by one offering he hath perfected for- 
ever them that are sanctified — verses 6, 7, 
1-0 and 14. 

After thus summing up this part of his argument, and 
showing that the fulfillment of the office of Christ's priest- 
hood is the sanctification, or perfection of the worshiper, 
the cleansing of the heart from all by sin; (in contradis- 
tinction to that of the Levitical, wihch " sanctified to the 
purifying of the flesh only,") he clinches it, by referring 
to the new-covenant promise thus : 

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to 
us : for after that he had said before — verse 15. 

He then repeats the promise, as at the commencement 
of this part of his argument, — chapter 8: 10. 

To make it more plain, I will quote this summing up, 
and clinching, consecutively, as he gives it: 



106 Signification of the Holy of Holies. 

By the which will we are sanctified through 
the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once 
for all. 

And every priest standeth daily ministering 
and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, 
which can never take away sins : 

But this man, after he had offered one sacri- 
fice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand 
of God ; 

From henceforth expecting till his enemies be 
made his footstool. 

For by one offering he hath perfected for 
ever them that are sanctified. 

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to 
us : for after that he had said before, 

This is the covenant that I will make with 
them after those days, saith the Lord; I will 
put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds 
will I write them — verses 10-16. 

Having explained the difference between the privileges 
of the two covenants, b} r showing the superior excel- 
lence of Christ's ministry or priesthood, over that of the 
Levitical, (in that it purges the conscience, or cleanses 
the heart from sin) the apostle closes his argument and 
urges his Hebrew brethren to enter into this new-cov- 
enant experience, or holy state of freedom from sin, in 
the following figurative language : 

Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter 
into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 

By a new and living way, which he hath con- 



Signification of the Holy of Holies. 107 

secrated for us, through the vail, that is to say, 
his flesh ; 

And having a high priest over the house of 
God; 

Let us draw near with a true heart in full as- 
surance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled 
from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed 
with pure water — verses 19-22. 

The term, "holiest," is here borrowed from the taber- 
nacle service, as in verse 8, chapter 9. 

It is there stated that the High Priest 1 s entrance into 
the second tabernacle, signified that the " way into the 
holiest of all" was not made manifest, while the first 
tabernacle was standing. 

The first tabernacle was a figure for the old-covenant 
dispensation. And as (by the apostle's showing, chapter 
10 : 9,) that dispensation was abolished, and the new es- 
tablished; he declares there is now liberty to enter into 
the k< holiest by the blood of Jesus. 1 ' 

The blood of the first covenant not being efficacious to 
take away sin, there was no liberty, or boldness, to enter 
the " holiest" or the new-covenant experience, for which 
" the tabernacle which is called the holiest of all " was a 
figure. 

Once more — (after exhorting his brethren to enter into 
the l ' holiest" and to be faithful in the duties of this life, 
lest they apostatize, or " draw back, 11 and be destroyed 
as willful sinners,) —the apostle compares the conse- 
quences of rejecting this new-covenant experience, or 



108 Signification of the Holy of Holies. 

salvation, with the punishment consequent upon reject- 
ing, or despising the law of the old-covenant, thus : 

He that despised Moses' law died without 
mercy under two or three witnesses : 

Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, 
shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden 
under foot the Son of God, and hath counted 
the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was 
sanctified, an unholy thing? — verses 28-29. 

The Holy of Holies was therefore typical @f the New 
Birth, or Sanctification, which was not attainable under 
the old-covenant dispensation. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

The hardness of heart that existed under the 
old-covenant dispensation. 

The condition of the heart of the worshiper under the 
old covenant was illustrated or figured forth by the two 
tables of stone on which the commandments were writ- 
ten. The heart was hard, stony, because it was not 
cleansed from sin. 

The commandments were written on tables of stone, 
indicative of the fact the heart was hard, stony, and 
could not be changed, or taken away, under that dispen- 
sation. 

The moral law required righteousness in the " inward 
parts; 1 ' but the ceremonial law had no power to give it, 
because it had no offerings that could take away sin. 
The life that is in Christ Jesus, it could not give. 

Hence, the ministration of the old covenant was 
called the "ministration of death." 

For if there had been a law given which 
could have given life, verily righteousness 
should have been by the law. — Gal. 3: 21. 

Now the shedding of the blood of Christ marked the 



UO Hardness of Heakt undek Old Covenant. 

commencement of the new-covenant era, in which era 
the stony heart was to be taken away according to the 
following promise : 

I will take away the stony heart out of your 
flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh. — Ezek. 
36:26. 

The new-covenant dispensation, or ministration, was 
to excel in glory, the glory of the old-covenant ministra- 
tion, because in those days, (the days of the new cove- 
nant,) the stony heart was to be taken away, and the 
" life that is in Christ Jesus " imparted. 

The new-testament dispensation is more glorious than 
the old, because it is the ministration of life, by the im- 
partation of righteousness to the " imvard parts." 

Says Paul, 

Who also, (that is, God,) hath made us able 
ministers of the new testament ; not of the let- 
ter, but of the spirit ; for the letter killeth, but 
the spirit giveth life. 

But if the ministration of death, written and 
engraven in stones was glorious, so that the 
children of Israel could not steadfastly behold 
the face of Moses for the glory of his counte- 
nance ; which glory was to be done away ; 

How shall not the ministration of the spirit 
be rather glorious ? 

For if the ministration of condemnation be 
glory, much more doth the ministration of 
righteousness exceed in glory. 



Hardness of Heakt under Old Covenant. Ill 

For even that which was made glorious had 
no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory 
that excelleth. 

For if that which is done away was glorious, 
much more that which remaineth is glorious. — 
2 Cor. 3:6-11. 

*' The ministration of death/' or " condemnation, " as 
I understand it, is so called because the Abrah imie cov- 
enant, or covenant of promise, with all the ceremonies 
and sacrifices of the law added, had no power to give 
life, until after it was ratified by the shed blood of 
Christ. 

The moral law condemned sin in the ■« inward parts " 
and yet there were no offerings under the law that could 
take it away. Hence, the old covenant was necessarily 
a *' minstration of death,' 1 and not cf life, or righteous- 
ness. 

Now this i4 ministration of death " was glorious be- 
cause it "sanctified to the purifying of the flesh." It 
provided for the pardon of sins, and accepted the faith 
of the worshiper in a promised Saviour, in lieu of the 
righteousness promised, in, or through Him. 

This faith in the coming Messiah was counted, or im- 
puted to them for righteousness. They all died in this 
faith, (that is, the true worshipers,) not having experi- 
enced the fulfillment of the promised righteousness that 
was to be imparted in due time through Christ's death. 

When Christ came, then came the " ministration of 
righteousness." " The ministration of death," or of 
41 condemnation," that is the ministration of the old- 



112 Hardness of Heakt under Old Covenant. 

covenant was " written and engraven in stones," indica- 
tive of the hardness of heart to which that ministration 
was administered. 

On account of this hardness of heart which could not 
be removed, it was said : An eye for an eye, and a tooth 
for a tooth. Jesus adds : But 1 say unto you, That ye re- 
sist not evil. — Mat. 5 : 38-39. 

They say unto him, Why did Moses then com- 
mand to give a writing of divorcement, and to 
put her away ? 

He saith unto them, Moses because of the 
hardness of your hearts suffered you to put 
away your wives : but in the beginning it was 
not so.— Mat. 19 : 7-8. 

Now if provision was made for the removal of this 
hardness of heart, under the old covenant, it was made 
in order to be used ; and if the worshiper did not avail 
himself of the benefits of this provision, he did not live 
up to the privileges of the covenant, and did not there- 
fore keep the covenant. 

On Mat. 19:7, Wesley has the following note : 

Why did Moses command — Christ replies, " Moses per- 
mitted," not commanded, " it, because of the hardness 
of your hearts ;" because neither your fathers nor you 
could bear the more excellent way. 

Now if there was provision made whereby the wor- 
shiper could have been freed from this hardness of 
heart, no sanction would have been given to indulge in 
it. For God did not make ample provision for the re- 



Hardness of Heart under Old Covenant. 113 

moval of this hardness of heart, (as He did, if He made 
any,) and then permit a law to be written, giving the 
worshiper liberty to indulge in it. He would not have 
been permitted to resist evil, according to the law of 
" an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' 11 

He would not have been permitted to put away his 
wife, when " it was not so from the beginning." 

If the worshiper could have had the stony heart taken 
away, he would not have been permitted by a written 
law, to indulge in those things so contrary to the law of 
Christ. 

When the Holy Ghost spake by the mouth of Isaiah 
saying, 

Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, 
and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. 

Then shall the lame man leap as a haft, and 
the tongue of the dumb sing : for in the wilder- 
ness shall waters break out, and streams in the 
desert. 

And the parched ground shall become a pool, 
and the thirsty land springs of water : in the 
habitations of dragons, where each lay, shall 
be grass with reeds and rushes. 

And an highway shall be there, and a way, 
and it shall be called The way of holiness ; the 
unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be 
for those : the way-faring men, though fools, 
shall not enter therein, (lsa. 35 : 5-8,) — he meant 
in the days of Christ. 

8 



114 Hakdness of Heakt under Old Covenant. 

There is a difference between the gospel days, and 
the days of the old covenant. 

The difference consists in a work that Christ does for 
His people since His coming, that He did not do before 
His coming. 

That work is the fulfillment of the new-covenant 
promise. 

Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I 
will make a new covenant with the house of 
Israel, and with the house of Jiidah. — Jer. 31: 
31. 

But this shall be the covenant that I will 
make with the house of Israel after those days, 
saith the Lord ; I will put my law in their 
inward parts, and write it in their hearts. — Jer. 
31:33. 

And thou shalt call his name Jesus : for he 
shall save his people from their sins. — Mat. 1 : 
21. 

Now if the people of God under the old covenant, 
could have looked beyond the offerings of the law to 
Christ, and by faith in the promised Messiah, could have 
been cleansed, or made perfect; just as the 'people of 
God can now, by faith, look to a Saviour that has come, 
and be cleansed, or made perfect, then there would be 
no difference between the two covenants. 

Then, the " ministration of death, written and en- 
graven in stones," or, (which is the same thing,) the 
ministration of the old covenant, would have been equal 



Hardness of Heart under Old Covenant. 115 

in glory to the "ministration of righteousness," or the 
ministration of the new covenant. 

The ministration of the new covenant which saves 
the soul from inbred sin, or all sin, constitutes the glory 
of the new-covenant ministration, which excels in glory, 
the glory of the old-covenant ministration. 

The salvation of the soul from inbred sin is what the 
people of God, under the old covenant, did not know, 
or understand, as it could be known, or understood, by 
experience only. 

This salvation constitutes the glory that was to follow 
the sufferings of Christ. 

Receiving the end of your faith, even the 
salvation of your souls. 

Of which salvation the prophets have in- 
quired and searched diligently, who prophesied 
of the grace that should come unto you : 

Searching what, or what manner of time the 
Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, 
when it testified beforehand the sufferings of 
Christ, and the glory that should follow. 

Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto 
themselves, but unto us they did minister the 
things, which are now reported unto you by 
them that have preached the gospel unto you 
with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven ; 
which things the angels desire to look into. — 1 
Pet. 1 : 9-12. 

Now the prophets did not search diligently to know, 
or understand concerning the salvation of the soul from 



116 Hardness of Heart under Old Covenant. 

the guilt of transgressions, for this they knew by expe- 
rience. All the true children of God were freed from 
the condemnation of actual sins committed, upon the 
conditions of repentance and the keeping of the law. 

But they did not know, or understand, concerning the 
salvation of the soul from inbred sin. Knowledge con- 
cerning this salvation was what they searched diligently 
for. This was the " what, or what manner of time " 
they did not understand. 

And it was revealed unto them, that " not unto them- 
selves," but unto us is this salvation ministered. 

They ' prophesied that this grace should come unto 
us;' but it was revealed to them that it was not for 
themselves. 

And these all, having obtained a good report 
through faith, received not the promise : 

God having provided some better thing for 
us, that thev without us should not be made 
perfect.— Heb. 11 : 39-40. 

They could all understand concerning the pardon of 
sins, but the salvation of the soul from all sin, or the 
New Birth, they and the angels also, desired to look 
into. 

The New Birth was what they could not understand. 



I»^HT SECOND. 

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED— NECESSARY CRITI- 
CISMS—CONCLUSIONS REACHED. 



CHAPTER XV. 

The objection that the worshiper could look be- 
yond the offerings of the law to Christ, and be 
cleansed, or made perfect. 

It is said that " Although the law made nothing per- 
fect, and that perfection was not by the Levitical priest- 
hood ; yet, the worshiper under the old covenant could 
look beyond the law, and the Levitical priesthood to 
Christ, the promised Messiah, and by faith in Him, be 
made perfect, even as under the new-covenant dispensa- 
tion." 

If therefore the above statement is true, then it was 
not only the privilege, but also a duty for the worshiper 
thus to be cleansed, or made perfect. If the law was a 
school-master pointing the worshiper to Christ, that he 
might be cleansed, or made perfect, in the present tense, 
then it became his duty, as a keeper of the law, thus to 



118 Looking beyond the Law for Perfection. 

be cleansed, or made perfect. He did not keep the law, 
unless he availed himself of the privilege thus pointed 
out. 

The law did not point the worshiper to Christ, the 
promised Messiah, as a Saviour from all sin, in the pres- 
ent tense, and at the same time leave it optional with 
him, with impunity, whether he was saved or not. 

The great and only design of the law would thus be 
defeated. For, if the worshiper could have thus been 
made perfect, or cleansed from all sin, and failed thus 
to be cleansed, the law was of no use to him. For by 
the law he could not be made perfect, and he has not fol- 
lowed its directions, pointing to Christ for cleansing, and 
has not therefore kept the law. 

If the offerings of the law pointed to Christ for 
cleansing from all sin in the present tense, the meaning 
of the law was, that the worshiper should be cleansed in 
the present tense. 

It is placing a fault in the wrong place, to say that the 
' laiu made nothing, or no man perfect, 1 if by following 
the directions of the law, the worshiper could have been 
made perfect ; for it would not be the fault of the law, 
but of the worshiper. 

When it is said that the " law made nothing perfect, 
but the bringing in of a better hope did,' 1 ' 1 the meaning is, 
that nothing, or no man, was made perfect, till the " bet- 
ter hope " was br 'ought in. 

What was meant by the term, " law" included all 
that could be done for the worshiper under the old cove- 
nant. 



Looking beyond the Law fok Petcfection. 119 

If perfection could have been attained by looking be- 
yond the offerings of the law to Christ; then, in that 
case, all that kept the law were made perfect, and per- 
fection was by the Levitical priesthood; for it procured, 
through Christ, all the benefits of Christ's death that are 
enjoyed under the new covenant, and there was no need 
of another priesthood. 

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical 
priesthood, (for under it the people received 
the law,) what further need was there that an- 
other priest should rise after the order of Mel- 
chizedek, and not be called after the order of 
Aaron.— Heb, 7: 11. 

The perfection here spoken of could not be realized, 
except by the priesthood of Christ. 

If the worshiper could look beyond the offerings of 
the law to Christ, and be made perfect, then, in that 
case, Paul's argument, or teaching, in the tenth chapter 
of Hebrews, as I understand it, makes out a wrong con- 
clusion. 

For, (says he,) the law having a shadow of 
good things to come, and not the very image of 
the things, can never with those sacrifices 
which they offered year by year continually, 
make the comers thereunto perfect. 

For then would they not have ceased to bo 
offered? because that the worshipers once 
purged should have had no more conscience of 
sins. — verses 1-2. 



120 Looking beyond the Law for Perfection. 

As I understand the verses just quoted, the meaning 
is this : to be made perfect, is to be purged from sin. 
By "sins," I understand inbred sin, as the offerings of 
the law made an atonement for actual sins, or trans- 
gressions. 

He continues : 

But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance 
again made of sins every year. 

For it is not possible that the blood of bulls 
and goats should take away sins. — verses 3-4. 

After showing that sin could not be taken away by 
the offerings of the law, the apostle quotes and explains 
the meaning of Christ's words in the fortieth Psalm 
thus : Wherefore, when he cometh into the world, he saith 
— That is, because sin could not be taken away by the 
offerings of the law, Christ said: 

Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not, but a 
body hast thou prepared me : 

In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou 
hast had no pleasure. 

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of 
the book it is written of me) to do thy will, 
God. — verses 5-7. 

In the eighth and ninth verses he repeats the substance 
of this quotation, and explains its meaning. 

This is his explanation : He taheth away the first, that 
he may establish the second — verse 9. That is, this say- 
ing of Christ, by the mouth of David, takes away the 
first, that He may establish the second covenant. 






Looking beyond the Law for Perfection. 121 

God had no pleasure in the offerings of the law, as a 
sacrifice for inbred sin, for they were not efficacious. 
They did not take it away. They did not answer His 
mind, or will ; and therefore His will was not accom- 
plished by these offerings. Christ must first come, and 
offer His body according to the will of the Father, be- 
fore the worshiper could be made perfect, or, (which is 
the same thing,) be sanctified. 

Sanctification, or the cleansing of heart, or conscience, 
(inmost soul,) from all sin, was the will of the Father. 

He was not pleased with the offerings of the law, be- 
cause they did not thus make perfect, or take away 
inbred sin. This, His will, could not be accomplished 
except through the " offering of the body of Jesus 
Christ." 

Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, God — verse 
9. 

By the which will we are sanctified through 
the offering of the body of Jesus Christ, once 
for all. — verse 10. 

For by one offering he hath perfected forever 
them that are sanctified. 

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to 
us ; for after that he had said before, 

This is the covenant that I will make with 
them after those days, saith the Lord : I will 
put my laws into their hearts, and in their 
minds will I write them. — verses 14-16. 

The sum of this argument, or teaching of Paul's, as I 
understand it, is this : the perfection, sanctification, or 



122 Looking beyond the Law for Perfection. 

purging of the worshiper, so that he would have no 
more consciousness of sin, was not attained to by the 
offerings of the law, and could not be, except through 
the " offering of the body of Jesas Christ;' 1 and also, 
that the will of God was not accomplished short of said 
sanctification, or perfection. 

The will of God, in regard to sanctification, was not 
done before Christ's coming. It was not done until 
after the establishment of the second covenant. 

The first covenant must be taken away before the sec- 
ond could be established. 

" He takelh away the first, that he may establish the sec- 

'Now if the worshiper could have been purged, or 
sanctified, by looking beyond the offerings of the law to 
Christ ; then, in that case, the will of God, in regard to 
sanctification, could have been accomplished before 
Christ's coming; which is contrary to the plain lan- 
guage of the texts quoted, and to the whole tenor of the 
argument therein contained, as I understand it. 

It is nowhere said in the Bible, that the, worshiper 
could look beyond the offerings of the law to Christ, 
and be made perfect. Directly the opposite of this is 
affirmed. 

Of the first tabernacle it is said : It was a " figure of 
the time then present, in which," (or during which 
time) " were offered both gifts and sacrifices that could 
not make him that did service perfect, as pertaining to 
the conscience." 



Looking beyond the Law for Perfection. 123 

" The time then present" lasted till Christ came. 

"Divers washings and carnal ordinances were im- 
posed on them, 1 ' (the worshipers,) " until the time of 
reformation. 11 "The time of reformation, 11 was the 
time when Christ came. 

The law of ceremonies " was added because of trans- 
gressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise 
was made. 11 That seed was Christ. 

The shutting, or locking up of the law, explained in 
the ninth chapter, is also in point here, as proof, that no 
one could look beyond the offerings of the law to Christ, 
and be made perfect. 

The " stone cut out without hands, 11 (seen by Neb- 
uchadnezzar in his dream,) and which " became a great 
mountain, and filled the whole earth, 11 represents the 
kingdom of Christ, set up by Christ, at His coming. 

And in the days of these kings, (that is when 
this stone smote the image, and began to fill the earth,) 
shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which 
shall never be destroyed. — Dan. 2 : 44. 

This was the kingdom referred to by John the Bap- 
tist, when he said, 

Repent ye : for the kingdom of heaven is at 
hand.— Mat. 3: 2. 

Christ means the same in the following words, made 
use of at the commencement of His preaching, 

From that time Jesus began to preach, and 
to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is 
at hand.— Mat. 4: 17. 



124 Looking beyond the Law for Perfection. 

This kingdom of heaven is the same as the " everlast 
ing righteousness" brought in at the end of the seventy 
weeks, as explained by the man Gabriel to Daniel.— 
Dan. 9 : 24. 

It could not therefore be experienced by looking be 
yond the offerings of the law, to Christ. 

This kingdom is the New Birth. 



CHAPTER XVI. 



The objection that Christ was considered as 
" slain , from the foundation of the world." 

The passage referred to as the ground of this objec- 
lon is the following : 

And all that dwell upon the earth shall wor- 
ship him, whose names are not written in the 
oook of life of the Lamb slain, from the founda- 
tion of the world. — Rev. 13 : 8. 

As I understand it, the meaning in this verse is not, 
,hat the Lamb was slain, from, or before the foundation 
>f the world, but that the names were written in the, 
>ook, from, or before the foundation of the world. 

The sense would be more clearly expressed with the 

I.ast clause of the verse transposed, thus : 
And all that dwell upon the earth shall wor- 
ship him, whose names are not written, from 
he foundation of the world, in the book of life 
)f the Lamb slain. 
This understanding of the text is sustained by the 
ighth verse of the seventeenth chapter ; where the same 



126 Chhist not Slain fkom the Foundation, etc. 

expression is made use of to designate the true children 
of God, but with the adjunct, " Lamb slain," left out: 

And they that dwell on the earth shall won- 
der whose names were not written in the book 
of life from the foundation of the world, when 
they behold the beast that was, and is not, and 
yet is. — Rev. 17. : 8. 

Wesley has the following note on the passage under 
consideration: .Averse 8. And all that dwell upon the 
earth will worship Aim-All will be carried away by the 
torrent, but the little flock of true believers. The name 
of these onlv is written in the Lamb's book of life." And 
if any of these " make shipwreck of faith," he will blot 
them "out of his book;" although they were written 
therein from (that is, before) the foundation of the 

world." ' 

It is true that Christ was not slain before the founda- 
tion of the world, and the evidence that He was consid- 
ered as slain, or the proof that that the faith of the wor- 
shiper, could fasten on Christ as a slain sacrifice, and be 
blessed in just the same way that he could h.ive been, 
had Christ in reality been slain before the foundation of 
the world, is nowhere found in the Bible, as I understand 

its teaching. 

Christ was promised, but the fulfillment of the prom- 
ise was " seen afar off." 

The worshiper could be pardoned through faith m a 
promised Saviour; but not sanctified, because this was 
not the covenant. 



CHAPTER XVII. 

Two passages of Scripture regarded as proof 
that sanctification was attainable under the 
old- covenant dispensation, considered. 

1. Speak unto all the congregation of the 
children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall 
be holy : for I the Lord your God am holy. — 
Lev. 19 : 2. 

All the children of Israel who kept the covenant en- 
joined on them, were considered holy, .because it was all 
that they could do. 

Thus doing, they were free from the condemnation of 
sin, and were considered holy. 

They lived up to God's requirements. 

They were all that He- designed they should be ; and 
were therefore free from any charge of sin, and in this 
sense were holy as God was holy. 

And as the covenant enjoined on them did not require 
the taking away of inbred sin, they were considered 
holy without its removal. 

The people of God under the new covenant are con- 



128 Levitcus 19 : 2, Considered. 

sidered holy when not fully redeemed from the effects of 
the fall. 

With our many faults and infirmities, lack of under- 
standing, and errors in judgment, together with these 
" vile bodies" which cannot be fully redeemed from the 
ruins of the fall, until this " corruptible shall have put 
on incorruption, and th ; s mortal shall have put on im- 
mortality," even in this partially redeemed state, we 
are considered holy, if we keep the covenant. 

The new covenant requires freedom from inbred sin. 
It requires the full* restoration of the moral image of 
God in the soul, through the blood of Christ. For His 
blood cleanses from all unrighteousness in a moral 
sense. But it does not change these " vile bodies," and 
* fashion them like unto Christ's most glorious body,' 
while in this life. 

The new covenant does not fully redeem us from the 
ruins of the fall in the present tense. It will not until 
1 death shall have been swallowed up in victory.' 

For we know that the whole creation groan- 
eth and travaileth in pain together until now : 

And not only they, but ourselves also, which 
have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we our- 
selves groan within ourselves, waiting for the 
adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.— 
Horn. 8 : 22-23. 

Notwithstanding we are not in this life redeemed 
from the bondage of corruption, yet we are to present 
our "bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto 
God." 



Psalm 51 : 10, Considered. 129 

Now if the new covenant made provision for the re- 
demption of the body here in this life, then, in that case, 
the body would have to be redeemed before the offering 
thereof would be- regarded as " holy, acceptable unto 
God." 

But as the covenant does not make provision for the 
redemption of the body here in this life, the offering 
thereof is regarded as holy, although yet in the bondage 
of corruption. 

So also under the old covenant ; as there was no pro- 
vision made for the taking away of inbred sin by the 
blood of Christ, the people of God were called holy, 
when this work was not accomplished. 

2. Create in rne a clean heart, God ; and 
renew a right spirit within me. — Ps. 51 : 10. 

This is one of the utterances of David, contained in a 
prayer for the forgiveness of sin, or transgression. The 
prayer commences with the following language : 

Have mercy upon me, God, according to 
thy loving kindness : according unto the multi- 
tude of thy tender mercies blot out my trans- 
gressions. 

Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and 
cleanse me from my sin. 

For I acknowledge my transgressions : and 
my sin is ever before me. 

Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and 
done this evil in thy sight. — Ps. 51 : 1-4. 



130 Psalm 51 : 10, Consideked, 

Again in verse seven he says : 
Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean : 
wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow, 
Again in verse nine — 

Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all 

mine iniquities. 
Then comes the passage under consideration — 
" Create in me a clean heart, God : and 

renew a right spirit within me." 

This expression of the Psalmist I understand to he a 
hendiadys— the first part of the figure meaning the same 
as the last. " Create in me a clean heart, God" 
means the same as, " renew a right spirit within me ; n 
which right spirit he had lost by transgression. 

He continues his prayer in the same form of speech 
and immediately adds in verses eleven and twelve : 

Cast me not away from thy presence ; and 
take not thy Holy Spirit from me. 

Bestore unto me the joy of thy salvation ; and 
and uphold me with thy free Spirit. 

When God forgives sin, He does it perfectly. It was, 
therefore proper for the Psalmist to say: " Wash me, 
and I shall be whiter than snow.' 1 '' 

Come now, and let us reason together, saith 
the Lord : though your sins be as scarlet, they 
shall be as white as snow ; though they be red 
like crimson, they shall be as wool. — Isa.l : 18. 

All who kept the covenant, under the old-covenant 



Psalm 51 : 10, Considered. 131 

dispensation, were made c&an, or purged from the guilt 
of transgression. 

In this sense they were holy. In this sense Job was 
a perfect man — perfect because he kept the covenant en- 
joined on him, and was therefore what God required 
him to be. 

When the worshiper sinned, he was to repent; and 
1-y repentance and the observance of the ceremonial law, 
he was considered washed thoroughly from his iniquity. 

The clean heart prayed for, means the pardon of sin. 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



Necessary criticism on the Wesleyan, or prevail- 
ing mode of teaching sanctification. 

According to the Wesleyan explanation of the doc- 
trine of sanctification, pardon, being a work done for 
the worshiper, is always accompanied by a work 
wrought Jin the heart, called "regeneration" or the 
44 new birth" 

This is, I think, the prevailing sentiment among those 
who teach the doctrine of sanctification. 

It is also said that this work wrought in the heart at 
the time of pardon, called 44 regeneration" or the "new 
birth" is sanctification commenced. That is, regenera- 
tion is sanctification commenced, but not completed. 

This work said to be wrought in the heart at the time 
of pardon, called " regeneration," or partial sanctifica- 
tion, (that is, sanctification commenced but not complet- 
ed,) is to be succeeded by a second work of blessing 
called " entire sanctification," or 44 holiness." 

Now I look upon this theory as involving an impossi- 
bility with God, as not necessarily true in experience, 



Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 133 

and as being without Scriptural foundation on which to 
sustain itself. 

1. It involves an impossibility with God. Regenera- 
tion, or sanctification commenced, being a distinct work 
wrought in the heart, by which the heart is partly re. 
newed, (according to the theory,) supposes that God 
commences the work of sanctification at the time of 
pardon, and leaves it incomplete. That is, He puts a 
new nature into the heart at the time of pardon, and at 
the same time leaves sin remaining theuein. 

This theory, as I understand it, involves an impossi- 
bility with God. For, regeneration being a distinct 
work wrought in the heart, whereby the heart is re- 
newed in righteousness, and made holy, is never partly, 
or imperfectly wrought. 

Regeneration, being a renewal of the heart whereby 
a new nature is imparted, cannot be imparted until the 
old former nature is taken away. 

The old former nature to be removed, or taken away 
is inbred sin, or the carnal mind, which is " enmity 
against God," and which cannot be subject to the law of 
God. 

The taking away of this carnal mind being a distinct 
work, wrought by God only, is never accomplished ex- 
cept on certain conditions. These conditions are estab- 
lished by God Himself, and must be fully complied with, 
on the part of the seeker, before^any part of the work 
can be accomplished. 

God's justice and holiness make it impossible for 
Him to take away this inbred sin, until after the seeker 



134 Wesley an Theory op Sanctification. 

has fully complied with the conditions upon which He 
has^promised to do the work. 

And it would be as much of an impossibility with 
God, to do a part of the work, (that is, regenerate or 
partly sanctify,) before the terms were complied with, 
on the part of the seeker, as it would be for him to do 
the whole of it. 

And when the conditions upon which God has prom- 
ised to take away inbred sin, are fully complied with, 
on the part of the seeker, it is an impossibility with 
God not to do the work, because He has promised to do 
it. 

It would be just as impossible* with God not to do the 
work, when the terms were complied with, as it would 
be for Him to lie. And it would be just as impossible 
for him to only partly do it, as it would be for Him not 
to do it at all. 

God's holiness makes it impossible with Him to sanc- 
tify or cleanse the heart, except on His own conditions. 
And the same holiness makes" it impossible for Him to 
partly sanctify, or cleanse it, when those conditions are 
complied with. 

According to the Wesleyan explanation of the doc- 
trine of sanctification, sanctification commences at the 
time of justification. 

This is Wesley's explanation in regard to the time : 

" Question. When does inward sanctification begin? 

•• Answer. In the moment a man is justified. (Yet sin 
remains in him, yea, the seed of all sin, till he is sane- 



Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 135 

titled throughout.) From that time a believer gradually 
dies to sin, and grows in grace.— Plain Account, p. 48. 

According to Wesley, the believer is partly sanctified 
when he is justified. He is then born of God, and this 
new birth is the beginning of sanctification The new 
birth is the same as sanctification, as far as it goes. 
The new birth partly destroys, or takes away inbred sin, 
and entire sanctification completes the work. 

According to Wesley, justification, or the new birth, 
(as he speaks of these two states, as one and the same,) 
is a real, but not an entire change of heart. 

" Question 17. But what need is there of it, seeing 
sanctification is a real change, not a relative only, like 
justification? 

Answer. But is the new birth a relative change only? 
Is not this a real change? Therefore, if we need no 
witness of our sanctification, because it is a real change, 
for the same reason we should need none that we are 
born of or are the children of God. 11 — Plain Account, 
p. 119. 

Wesley bore confounds the new birth with justification* 
The new birth, of course, is a real change, but not a 
partial one. But he claims that the new birth is the 
beginning of sanctification. That is, it partly sanctifies 
or renews the heart, and at the same time leaves the 
"seed of all sin " remaining therein. 

According to the statement of the question, justifica- 
tion is a relative change only; but is not necessarily 
accompanied by the new birth, as Mr. Wesley probably 
means, when he confouuds it with justification. 



136 Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 

It is just as much of an impossibility with God to 
partly sanctify, as it is for Him to partly pardon ; and 
for the same reason. God alone can forgive sin, and he 
never partly forgives, or justifies. God alone can sanc- 
tify, or cleanse the heart, and he never partly cleanses 
it. 

If the work of sanctification was the work of men, 
they might partly do it; thus leaving a part unsanctified 
— a foot-hold, fort, or fortification, in which for the Devil 
to intrench himself, (as in his own possessions) and 
thence command the whole field, unless God should con- 
sent to occupy a part of it with him. 

But God does not thus do Bis work. 

When the whole heart is given to Him, He sanctifies, 
or cleanses the whole of it, It is a perfect work; as in 
the case of justification 4 . 

The sinner is perfectly cleansed from the guilt of 
transgression, when he repents, and believes in the Lord 
Jesus Christ. All his guilt is thus removed. 

When the pardoned sinner is made to see and feel the 
leprosy of inbred sin, and comes to Christ with all the 
heart, he is cleansed perfectly, 'wholly, from this inbred 
sin. 

I hope it may not be considered impertinent to the 
notion of partial sanctification, to ask its advocates the 
following questions: If the heart is partly sanctified at 
the time of justification, what part is left unsanctified ? 
What part, or how large a proportion remains to be 
sanctified? 



Wesley an Theory of Sanctification. 137 

The word sanctification, as used in the New Testa- 
ment, (when haying reference to the moral state of the 
heart) means its cleansing, or purification from all sin. 

It is only another way of expressing the renewal of 
the heart in righteousness, called sometimes "regenera- 
tion," or the " new birth." 

It signifies the taking away of sin, and the writing of 
the law of God in the heart. 

It means, " to put on the new man, which after God is 
created in righteousness and true holiness." 

That the word sanctification, as used in the New Tes- 
tament in describing the moral state of the heart, means 
the same as the " washing of regeneration, and renew- 
ing of the Holy Ghost," (whereby the heart is cleansed 
from all sin, and made perfect in Christ,) will appear 
from Heb 10: 1-22. 

In this reference, sanctification is spoken of as a per- 
fection whereby the heart is cleansed from all sin, and is 
declared to be the same as the writing of the law of 
God in the heart. 

As the heart cannot be regenerated, or born again, 
when sin remains therein (because the new birth makes 
a new creature b} r the taking away of the sinful heart, 
and the giving of a new heart that is not sinful) : so 
neither can it be sanctified, when sin remains therein; 
for sanctification is the cleansing of the heart from sin. 

For the law having a shadow of good things 
to come, and not the very image of the things, 
can never with those sacrifices, which they of- 



138 Wesleyan Theory of Sa notification. 

fered year by year continually, make the comers 
thereunto perfect. 

For then would they not have ceased to be 
offered ? because that the worshipers once 
purged should have had no more conscience of 
sins.— Heb. 10: 1-2. 

The perfection here spoken of, is the perfection of 
being cleansed from all sin. This perfection is called 
sanctification. 

By the which will we are sanctified through 
the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once 
for all. — verse 10. 

For by one offering he hath perfected forever 
them that are sanctified. — verse 14. 

As I understand it, all sin must be taken out of the 
heart, before the heart can be made new. It cannot be 
a new or changed heart, while inbred sin remains 
therein. 

The image of God cannot be restored, as it was before 
the fall, until all sin is taken out of the heart. A little 
sin would destroy it. 

In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth 
anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new crea- 
ture.— Gal. 6: 15. 

No one can be a " new creature in Christ Jesus," 
until he has a new heart. And he cannot have a new 
heart, while sin remains therein, because it would be 
the same old heart. A little seed would be the seed of 
all sin. 



West.eyan Theory of Sanctification. 13£ 

The perfection of sanctification takes all sin out of 
the heart. 

Now this is what I understand by the new birth. A 
man that is born of God, bears the image of God. He 
is like God, in heart. And to be like God, in heart, he 
must be cleansed from all sin. 

They that are born of God, 

Have put off the old man with his deeds : 
And have put on the new man, which is re- 
newed in knowledge after the image of him 
that created him. — Col. 3:10. 

They that are born of God, are conformed to the 
image of Christ. And in that image, there is no sin. 

For whom he did foreknow, he also did pre- 
destinate to be conformed to the image of his 
Son.— Rom. 8: 29. 

Therefore, if the seed of all sin remains in the heart, 
the image of Christ cannot be there. It cannot be a new 
heart. It cannot be born of God. 

It will be seen by investigation, that regeneration, and 
the new birth, or " a being born again," are synony- 
mous terms. 

When Jesus said, 

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man 
be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of 
God, (John 8 : 3,) 

lie used the word 4t gcnnelhe" from " gcnnao" which 
means, to beget, generate, to bring forth, bear, give 
birth to. 



14:0 Wesley an Theohy of Sanctification. 

When he said, 

Verily I say unto you, That ye which have 
followed me in the regeneration, (Mat. 19: 28.) 

He used the word " paling e?iesia" rendered regener- 
ation. A being born again, a new birth, is the literal sig- 
nification of " paling enesia" It has the same meaning 
as " gennethe." 

Therefore when Jesus says, " Ye which have followed 
me in the regeneration," the meaning is, ye which have 
been made like unto me by the new birth. 

" Regeneration " is used twice in the Bible. Titus 3 : 
5, reads: 

Not by works of righteousness which we 
have done, but according to his mercy he saved 
us, by the washing of regeneration, and renew- 
ing of the Holy Ghost. 

Tn this place, regeneration has the same meaning as 
in the former reading; and the washing referred to, as I 
understand it, is the washing of the heart from sin, 
inbred sin. 

" The washing of regeneration," the new birth, and 
sanctification, all mean the same thing: namely, the 
cleansing of the heart from sin, and its renewal in the 
image of Christ. 

I think this plainly appears from the nature of the 
work, and from the Scriptural terms used to express it, 
— all of which mean a new heart. 

As I understand it, the Wesley an error in regard to 
sanctification, consists in teaching, first, that the nevf 
birth is always experienced at the time of justification. 



Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 141 

Secondly, in teaching that the ''seed of all sin" may 
remain in the heart, subsequent to the time of the new 
birth. 

As experience proves, inbred sin may remain in the 
heart subsequent to the time of justification, at which 
time Wesley understands the new birth to take place. 

It must therefore be true that the new birth does net 
take away inbred sin, or else it is not experienced at the 
time of justification, according to the Wesleyan theory. 

And inasmuch as to " be born again," is to be made 
a "-new creature" and as the believer cannot be a " new 
creature " while the seed of all sin remains in the heart, 
therefore the new birth is not experienced at the time of 
justification, according to the Wesleyan theory. 

Now the latter named error grows out of the first. 
For, if the first is a truth, (as Wesley teaches,) the lat- 
ter must be a truth also. 

If the believer does experience the new birth at the 
time of justification, the " seed of all sin " remain in 
the heart after the new birth ; for experience proves that 
it is not taken away at the time of justification. 

And out of the latter named error grows the notion of 
partial sanctification. For if the believer can be born 
again, and yet the " seed of all sin " remains in the 
heart, he can be partly sanctified. Hence the expres- 
sion: *' Entire sanctification " — as though the believer 
had previously been partly sanctified ; which has been 
shown to be an impossibility. 

2. The notion of being partly sanctified is not sus- 
tained by experience. 



142 Wesleyan Theoky of Sanctification. 

It undoubtedly has its foundation in the supposition 
that when the believer is jnstindd, there must necessarily 
be a change of heart, because he always loves the things 
he once hated, and hates the things he once loved. 

He has the peace of God filling his heart, and the 
supposition is, that he is a " new creature ; n or, that he 
is partly a ' ; nevv creature ,: — so much so. at least, that 
he is partly sanctified, or, which is the same thing, 
(according to Wesley,) regenerated or born again. 

It is not supposed possible that the great change which 
invariably accompanies the pardon of sins, can be 
effected by anything short of the new birth. Whereas, 
the whole change is effected simply by the gift of the 
Spirit, which is never withholden when the worshiper is 
at peace with God. Where the Spirit is given, there of 
course are all the fruits of the Spirit. 

The change effected by pardon under the old cove- 
nant, was the same as that which is effected by pardon 
under the new covenant. 

Peace with God, and the gift of the Spirit was the re- 
sult of justification under the old covenant, as much as 
it is under the new. 

Therefore being justified by faith, we have 
peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 
— Rom. 5:1. 

In both cases, the believer being filled with joy and 
peace through the presence of the Spirit, has a desire to 
do the will of God. His will has been conquered and 
brought into harmony with God's will. His will is to 



Wesley an Theory of Sanctification. 143 

be right, and to do right; but he finds a 'law in his 
members warring against the law of his mind.' 
It is the " law of sin and death.' 1 ' 1 

Now the pardoned worshiper under the old covenant 
was never free from this law, because the promise by 
which it is removed did not belong to that covenant. 

And yet the pardoned or justified worshiper under the 
old covenant exhibited all the fruits of the Spirit — love, 
joy, peace, gentleness, meekness, faith, etc., and delight- 
ed in the law of God. Fie enjoyed the presence and 
communion of the Spirit of God, and ' spake as he was 
moved upon by the Holy Ghost/ The gift of the Spirit 
produced all the results exhibited in his life and conver- 
sation, and that without any regeneration or new birth. 

As the true worshiper under the old covenant exhib- 
ited the fruits of the Spirit, or the traits of character, 
and all the genuine marks, or signs of regeneration that 
are clamed for those who are said to be partly sancti- 
fied, or born again, under the new covenant, and as 
there was no regeneration or new birth possible, under 
the old covenant, therefore the believer, under the new 
covenant may be justified, without experiencing regen- 
eration, or the new birth. 

As the believer under the new covenant gives no 
more evidence of being born again, when he is par- 
doned, than the believer under the old covenant did, 
when he was pardoned, therefore it is not necessarily 
true that he is born again at the time of justification. 
For pardon or justification is the same under both cove- 



144 Wesleya.n Theory of Sanctification. 

nants ; and the fruits exhibited in this state of grace are 
the same in both cases. 

When God made the following new-covenant promise : 
"Twill put my law in their inward parts and write it 
in their hearts,' 1 '' He did not promise to partly do it. 

The fact, howeyer , which is abundantly proved by ex- 
perience, that inbred sin is found to exist in the heart, 
subsequent to the pardon of sins, is sufficient proof that 
it has nerer in any degree been destroyed or taken away. 
For God cannot partly do it. 

3. The theory of being partly sanctified has no Scrip- 
tural foundation. 

The principal passage quoted in support of this dogma 
is the following: 

And the very God of peace sanctify you 
wholly ; and I pray God your whole spirit and 
soul and body be preserved blameless unto the 
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. — 1 Thess. 
5:23. 

In this verse, the pronoun you has a collective, as 
well as an individual application. It means the whole 
church, as a body, as much as it means the individual 
member separately. 

Paul commences this letter to the Thessalonians thus : 
"Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the Church." 
After this, the word " church" does not occur, but a rep. 
resentative pronoun takes its place. 

If, instead of the present reading the apostle had said : 
"And the very God of pea ze sanctify the church wholly" 



Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 145 

the meaning would have been the same, as in the present 
reading. 

With this exchange of words, the apostle's meaning 
is obvious. A part of the church was sanctified, and a 
part of it was not. 

That the apostle in his letters to the churches, speaks 
of the church, as a body, and regards it as a unit, is ev- 
ident from the following language : 

And he gave some, apostles ; and some, proph- 
ets ; and some, evangelists ; and some, pastors 
and teachers : 

For the perfecting of the saints, for the work 
of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of 
Christ.— Eph. 4: 11-12. 

From whom the whole body fitly joined to- 
gether and compacted by that which every 
joint supplieth, according to the effectual work- 
ing in the measure of every part, maketh in- 
crease of the body unto the edifying of itself 
in love. — verse 16. 

Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, 
and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions 
of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which 
is the church. — Col. 1 : 24. 

These Scriptures prove that the church, the body of 
Christ, is regarded Iry the apostle, as a unit. 

It is not, therefore, inconsistent with the apostle's 
manner of address, to pray that the church of the 
Thessalonians, as a body, should be wholly sanctified. 

10 



146 Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 

It is just as consistent to suppose that some of them 
were sanctified, and some of them not sanctified, as it is 
to claim that some of them were "unruly," and some 
of them " feeble minded ; " which is plainly declared 
in the fourteenth verse. 

It is just as consistent, grammatically and logically, to 
apply the apostle's language to the collective body of 
the church, as it is to apply it to the members separately 
— thereby assuming that they were partly sanctified. 
And inasmuch as it has been shown that it is an im- 
possibility for the believer to be partly sanctified, the 
same as it is impossible for him to be partly born again , 
or partly pardoned, there is no other consistent way to 
explain the passage under consideration. 

This passage does not, therefore, sustain the dogma 
that the believer can be partly sanctified. 

Another portion of Scripture referred to as proving 
the notion of partial sanctification is the following : 

And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as 
unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto 
babes in Christ. 

I have fed you with milk, and not with meat : 
for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither 
yet now are ye able. 

For ye are yet carnal : for whereas there is 
among you envying, and strife, and divisions, 
are ye not carnal, and walk as men ? — 1 Cor. 3 : 
1-3. 

It is thought by those who teach the dogma of partial 
sanctification, that the Corinthians were regenerated or 



Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 147 

born again because they are spoken of as babes in 
Christ, 

And as they are spoken of at the same time as being 
carnal, the inference is drawn that they were but partly 
sanctified. It is thought that they would not have been 
spoken of as babes in Christ, unless they were born 
again ; and that they would not have been spoken of as 
carnal, after they were wholly sanctified. 

The conclusion is therefore reached, that they were 
partly, but not wholly sanctified. 

All that need be said in answer to the above reasoning 
is, first: men are not babes in Christ, as a matter of 
course, until after they are born again. 

Secondly, they are, and always have been, liable to 
fall from this new birth ; and as soon as they do fall, 
they are always carnal. 

I think it is generally admitted by those who believe 
in what they call " entire sanctification, " that those in 
possession of this blessing may lose it, or fall from it. 

As I understand the spiritual condition of the Corinth- 
ian brethren, they were babes in Christ by virtue of the 
new birth, or what is the same thing, regeneration, or 
sanctification; and as babes, they were weak, and unac- 
quainted with the wiles of the enemy. 

As a very natural consequence growing out of this 
infantile state of experience, they had fallen into these 
errors, or carnal disputations, and were therefore carnal. 

They had been sanctified, as stated in the first part of 
the epistle, chapter 1:2: Unto the church of God, which 
is at Corinth, to them that arc sanctified in Christ Jesus. 



148 Wesleyan Theory of Saxctieioatiox. 

' k To them that are sanctified,-' does not mean them that 
are partly sanctified. 

They had fallen from this sanctification into carnal 
practices, and in this state, Paul could not speak unto 
them, as nnto spiritual, but as unto carnal. 

They could not bear strong meat, because they were 
carnal. 

They had fallen into this carnal state, because of their 
weakness, and inexperience, as babes in Christ. 

If men do become carnal, after they are sanctified, 
whv not the Corinthians? 



CHAPTER XIX, 

Conclusions reached,. 

The conclusions at which I arrive from the foregoing 
considerations are the following: 

1. Pardon only, was bestowed by the old-covenant 
ministration. 

Sanctification, or the new birth, in addition to 
pardon is bestowed by the new-covenant ministration. 

3. Pardon, or justification, by the old covenant minis- 
tration was just what it is by the new. 

It is no part of sanctification, or the new birth. It 
does not include any destruction of the body of inbred 
sin. 

Sanctification, or the new birth, does not necessarily 
accompany it. 

Hence, no one should think that because his sins have 
been forgiven, that therefore he is regenerated, or horn 
again; or that thereby he has a title to eternal life. 

4. The new birth, and 3anctification, are synonymous 
terms, and signify the renewal of the heart in •' right- 
eousness and true holiness." 



150 Conclusions Reached. 

They both mean what is expressed in the following 
language : 

And that ye put on the new man, which after 
God is created in righteousness and true holi- 
ness. — Eph. 4 : 24. 

5. By the foregoing premises, a state of justification was 
salvable ground for the believer under the old covenant* 
because this state met the conditions of the covenant : 
but under the new covenant, the believer must be sancti- 
fied, or born again, because this state only, meets the 
conditions of the covenant. 

6. By the foregoing premises, two inconsistencies are 
avoided : 

(1.) The inconsistency of teaching that a second work, 
or blessing, must be experienced subsequent to the new 
birth, before the heart is cleansed from all sin. 

In regard to this contradiction, or inconsistency, there 
has been much disputation ; and it has never been either 
logically or scripturally explained how a man can be 
born of God, and at the same time have the seed of all 
sin remaining in him. 

But if we understand that justification is no part of 
the new birth, the contradiction is avoided. It is easy to 
understand how the believer can be justified, and have 
'the seed of all sin remaining in the heart. 

Whosoever is born of God doth, not commit 
sin ; for his seed remaineth in him : and he can- 
not sin, because he is born of God.— 1 John 3 : 9. 






Conclusions Reached. lol 

Whosoever is born of God retains the seed by which 
he was born. And the seed by which the believer is 
born of God, and the seed of all sin cannot remain in 
the heart at the same time, unless the tree can be both 
good and corrupt at the same time. 

Either make the tree good, and his fruit good ; 
or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit cor- 
rupt ._ x \lat. 12: 33. 

(2.) The inconsistency of teaching that ' without holi- 
ness no man shall see the Lord,' and at the same time 
teaching that the believer is on salvable ground when 
justified"— that is, when partly sanctified, or partly holy, 
(according to the Wesleyan theory.) 

Among those who believe in the doctrine of sanctifi- 
eation, some teach that the believer is not on salvable 
around unless the heart is cleansed from all sin. 
te Others think that he is on salvable ground when in a 
justified state only. 

This last class say, that when justified, the believer is 
born of God, and that God will not cast off His own 
children; but will cat short the work in righteousness, 
and save the soul. 

Now if we understand that the new covenant requires 
the new birth, or sanctification, by which the heart is 
cleansed from all sin, we shall see at once? that the con- 
ditions of the covenant are not met, and that consequent- 
ly the believer cannot be on salvable ground short of 
said sanctification, or new birth. 

7. By the foregoing considerations, the error of con- 



152 Conclusions Reached. 

founding the new birth with justification, and the^conse- 
quent dogma of partial^ sanctification are exposed, and 
clearly shown to be unscriptural. 

8. By the foregoing premises, justification is shown 
to be a relative change only, and sanctification, or Hie 
new birth, the only real change; and that never partial. 

By these premises, the confusion of ideas, conflicting 
sentiments, and controversy, which must naturally flow, 
as results of dividing sanctification, or the new' birth' 
into two separate works, or parts, are avoided; and the 
doctrine of Sanctification, or the New Birth, simplified 
according to the Scriptures. 



EEEATA 



Iii giving the foregoing pages a hasty reading from the press, 1 
find the following typographical errors ; some of which materially 
affect the sense of the reading matter, but which it is now too late 
to correct in the proper place. Also, other errors of the same class, 
in punctuation, too numerous and unimportant to mention : 

Page 21, line 13 from top— for " motion," read notion. 
Page 31, line 1— for " this law," read the law. 

Page 75, line 33 from top— for, " he could serve not," read, he could 
not serve. 
Page 105, line 18 from top— read by, after the word worshiper. 
Page 100, line 7 from top—read that, after the word fact. 

Page 132, line 4 from bottom—read or, for " of" before the word 
blessing. 

Page 141, line 19 from top— for "remain" read remains. Also, 
line 24 from top— for " remains," read remain. 



T 1 1 E N E W B 1 Li T H . 



OR 



Bible Sanctification. 



fbT 
7<C 



jC.CCC* 

CC<^CC 

CccCw: 
<&2Cg 



C « 

! Ci3 

e ■ 

cc 

L. ca>. 






i c< c c 

< Cc r'c 

G cc 
a cc: 

cc c di 

cc cc: 

C C C *L_ 

clc cc: 
CjCLiCj^ 

c c c 

^ssl: c 
c c c_ 

c ..«£.. C 



_ CC «C~ 

Cc cc 



::_ c c c cc 
, c ca c cc 

C C C c o 

CcC c cc 
Ccc c c c 

^C c cc 



-dec 
cc«& - 

» dXcc ^ 
r<OKc< 

-<:«££ < 

C<Cc V 

<CC <4 *. 






c c 

C C 

c c 



eery c 

Sg «&&- C 

>5C /.<SSB C < 

C (<C c< " 

1 cd~ CC u, 

r."«gcc Ci,- 
:' <c < c 
: ccc c cc 
iT«3 Ci<3p 

-C <£« 



^ _ cd~ ' C 



^_C<K£ C < 

CCSC'O. 
c 4c::ccc: -■<<_ > 

C.'<3&£ C< 



c C Cc 

: ccc 
cdc 
ccc 
c: dc 

CCC 

c cc 

ccc 



"'((" d^<OC CLd_« r < << 

£ roe c^gs*-^ 

, . <: Cl"«d d_C5< c 

& c c!?sj 

" ' c^C^^CS 
-., c CI' cdL dL^CS ^-^ 
- ^ cC 



cc d ci> c 

«C d<l C 

ccc cc c 



<C<£ dA 



C ; x CI; ( ' c 
cc < cr * 

cc d < 

<^C d'^ 

m 

_ CC C ' 

; cc «: * ' tr 

fc €& CI <^ 

CC c c cc « 

J0Z d. Cv C< CC J 

XC <^ Cc ^c <^ 

JEC cc cc cc: <s 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 

Cranberry Tow- 



<^ 



<< <c Cj 



<3X CaS 
«£ cc< 



cc < c «d Clc<.c 

d < C c<CL <gU« 

X < c «CL C — 
Cc* ^ c <a£L c **■. 
cc c c < 

\ < c < 

Ct < c 41 
C< C < < 
7 < 
^' <1* c < 

r c c c 
C c r< c 

C C « 

cl< c «lc 



C <T 






Si ^ <^ C^ <C 

: <c <zs c c 
^ C <2 C c 
C C CTc Cc <II7 

r c: <c oc <z~< 

r c <2 <r < <Z. ■ 

c c:<l«s d> 



r 5: <:c <c «r_ 

cc cc <1_ 

CL <£ cc <^_ 

^ <L CLc cc ^L 

<L. Cc CC «Z_ 

<T! <1 CL<C - 

<r cccr 



<^ cv 



< < 



<i c c acc< <i <: 
<: c c: c<cc <l <: 



c c: «ccc ^: <. 
d c c: <*3< <: . <: 

<; c c: «o <: 
<: c <z< «c 



<L ccc 



< 


< 


• C 


c 


< 


< < 


■< 

< 


< 
<< 
< 


C 

c 


<- 

< 


< 


c 

c 


< 


<< 


< 


<: 


c 


c 


C 


< 


c 


< 


< 


< 


< 




c 



